[AFS3-std] Re: AFS3 Standardization and Independent Submissions - response from ISE

[Andrew Deason]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 11:28:26 -0400
Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> wrote:

> However, we had the "should we be a working group" discussion before,
> and mostly came to the conclusion that we should not.  We certainly
> could revisit that discussion, but I think most of Jeff's arguments
> still apply.

From my perspective, the most insurmountable problem that the ISE may
not have been aware of when he made those suggestions is that
(sufficiently thorough) documentation for the existing protocols does
not exist. And what I hear from others in these discussions is that to
be an IETF WG, we need to effectively standardize the existing protocol
before we can make any movement on new changes.

And I believe I can say that at least most of the community feels that
standardizing all of the existing protocols _before_ we can add one
field to an RPC, or define one more flag, etc is a deal-breaker. I think
that aspect of our situation tends to be very non-obvious to others
until someone makes a point of mentioning it.

-- 
Andrew Deason
adeason@sinenomine.net