Hi, Thomas. On Apr 23, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Thomas Narten wrote:
>> Dec 2012 Problem Statement submitted for IESG review >> Dec 2012 Framework document submitted for IESG review >> Dec 2012 Data plane requirements submitted for IESG review >> Dec 2012 Operational Requirements submitted for IESG review >> Mar 2012 Control plane requirements submitted for IESG review >> Mar 2012 Gap Analysis submitted for IESG review >> Apr 2012 Recharter or close Working Group > > You presumably mean 2013 for the last 3. Yes, that does seem like a more achievable target... > That said, I really hope the WG can get all of its documents to the > IESG by December. That gives the WG 7-8 months and 2 IETF > meetings. Not an easy task, but if it takes the WG a full year before > it gets to doing anything beyond requirements, etc., that does not > paint a very encouraging picture. I recall during the BOF someone > (Jon Hudson?) stating that industry is already well ahead of the IETF > in this space... I agree, the NVO3 WG needs to move quickly. And aggressive milestone dates might help motivate speed. On the other hand, realistic dates might improve our credibility with outside observers - it would be nice if we were on-time rather than "late" delivering on our milestones. And of course we always have the option of doing things faster than the milestones suggest. :) Cheers, -Benson
