Subject: Fw: [Icar] Moving on with ICAR: WG formation and charter

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 14:15:37 +0900

Dear co-chairs,

The attached e-mail may have been before your time (Alex was still
kicking ICAR forward at the time), but I am curious about your
thoughts on it.

I won't be able to attend the session (as of now), but am hoping that
we come up with some level of indirection, for everyone's benefit...

Spencer

From: "Alex Zinin" <[email-masked]>
To: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Icar] Moving on with ICAR: WG formation and charter

> Spencer,

[deleted down to]

>
> > I know Alex is the routing AD - are we trying to move from a
broadcast
> > LAN  in a working group to a routed network of reviewers? I've
been
> > following manet for a while, and think self-organizing routed
networks
> > is still a research topic :-} Actually, if this is what you are
trying
> > to do, it's worth saying so explicitly, because if this is what
you're
> > trying to do, we tend to rely on hierarchies for scalability :-{
>
> Nice one ;)
>
> Again, seems the new thread on review types should help.
> Using your analogy though, I think the goal should be to encourage
> paying more attention to the traffic on the broadcast segment,
> AND improve scalability of the router network so we can push
> more traffic through it.
>
> My frank opinion regarding improving the former (broadcast or
> unstructured review) is that it cuts into the area of motivation and
> incentive, and we as the organization can only do so much here by
> making sure people find required information easier, maybe give more
> credits, etc. I personally do not know how to make sure more people
> "care about the Internet" more...
>
> Alex

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