Subject: RE: AD review of: draft-ietf-tewg-measure-05.txt

From: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 08:03:55 -0500

Jim,

> A bit of background - this WG item was intended to make the essential 
> measurements needed well defined enough that the way these "entities" were 
> measured across implementations (e.g. vendors) would be consistent.  

Yes, a critical need.

<...>

> I recommend we do the following clean up
> 
> - Somewhere provide a CRISP set of recommendations

Yes.

> - Remove all discussion which does not directly re-enforce a recommendation

Or move the discussion to an Annex if it is useful in supporting the recommendations.

>   - Maybe one option will be to remove the WG item completely

Disagree.  The need is important (some say 'critical'), I don't recall anyone saying the WG item in not important and should be dropped.

Thanks,
Jerry

---

From: "Merike Kaeo" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 07:58:58 -0700

There is indeed a critical need for this sort of document and I strongly
agree that the recommendations need to be made more succinct.....there are
hints of what is recommended but specific recommendation details should be
explicitly stated without ambiguity in them.  Jim has made some excellent
comments to that effect.

- merike

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <[email-masked]>
To: "Jim Boyle" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <[email-masked]>; "Tewg (E-mail)"
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 6:03 AM
Subject: RE: AD review of: draft-ietf-tewg-measure-05.txt

Jim,

Yes, a critical need.

<...>

Yes.

> - Remove all discussion which does not directly re-enforce a
recommendation

Or move the discussion to an Annex if it is useful in supporting the
recommendations.

>   - Maybe one option will be to remove the WG item completely

Disagree.  The need is important (some say 'critical'), I don't recall
anyone saying the WG item in not important and should be dropped.

Thanks,
Jerry