Subject: [bmwg] Request to BMWGers.

From: Kevin Dubray <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:38:16 -0500

OK, I don't often ask for favors, so here it is:

The BMWG draft <draft-ietf-bmwg-mcastm-10.txt> is in its last few
days of WG last call.  We've been at this since 1999, folks.

The current state of affairs seems to be that the editors
strongly believe the I-D presents enough detail regarding the
stated methodologies so as to be useful; a few believe that the
I-D does not.

So, I'd like a few intrepid souls (there's hundreds of you out
there, you know) to read the I-D, assess the methodologies' utility
and correctness, and voice whether you think the draft should progress 
towards an RFC.

Some things to consider:

    A) Does the methodologies conform to the metrics prescribed in
       RFC 2432?
    B) Are the collection methodologies technically sound?
    C) Does a methodology provide sufficient guidance so that a
       reasonable person following it will generate accurate and
       repeatable results for a given device behavior and associated
       operational profile.

So, if you haven't [read then] chimed in, please do your IETF duty.

Thank you for your support! :-)

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg