Subject: RE: [Capwap] WGLC timeline for Evaluation draft

From: "Saravanan Govindan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:20:10 +0800

Dave,

I think the Evaluation Team has made solid recommendations based on its
review. 

My concern is that as a WG document, which is an output from the CAPWAP
WG as a whole, the Evaluation draft should also incorporate key findings
made outside the Evaluation Team review. 

For consideration, these 'other' findings can be included in a separate
section that clearly highlights their origins. 

This way, the Evaluation document will cover greater analyses of the
protocols and help implementers understand the CAPWAP protocol better. 

I hope this helps to better understand my concern. 

Cheers,

Saravanan

-----Original Message-----
From: Nelson, David [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:42 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Capwap] WGLC timeline for Evaluation draft

Saravanan Govindan writes...

> To have discussions on the key recommendations of the 
> Comparative Analysis draft and then incorporate them in
> the final Evaluation draft based on consensus.

With all due respect, the Evaluation Team draft (and eventual
Informational RFC) documents the proceedings and findings of the CAPWAP
WG Evaluation Team, during a specific period of time when the Eval Team
was in operation.  The draft is intended to accurately reflect that
process, as an historical record.  The recommendations of the Eval Team
are not binding upon the WG.  However, the WG is not expected to
*revise* the record of the Eval Team proceedings, except to correct
errors of fact.

For that reason, adding substantive comments and recommendations, that
did not come from the Eval Team proceedings, into the Eval Team draft
would not be appropriate.

Regards,

Dave
 
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

Archives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/capwap

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

Archives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/capwap

---

From: "Nelson, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:06:28 -0500

> section that clearly highlights their origins.

I understand your concerns, but this is not the process that was agreed to by the Evaluation Team, the WG Chairs and the Area Directors.  The Eval Team draft reports the procedings and findings of the Eval Team.  It is what it is.  It is, in fact, *not* the output of the WG as a whole, but specifically the output of the Evaluation Team.  This same process has been used multiple times in various IETF WGs.

The WG is free to publish whatever additional evaluation documents it wishes, but I don't beleive it is appropriate to add opinions and recommendations to the Eval Team document that did not originate from within the Eval Team process.

Regards,

Dave