Subject: [Rucus] RUCUS direction?

From: Thomas Froment <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:44:14 +0100

My 2 cents, after today's BOF, I am trying to formalize what 
contributions could be in the scope of a future RUCUS "exploratory 
group", as suggested in particular by Jonathan Rosenberg.
I do so, because, it seems some people asked for 'use cases' documents, 
some other for 'deployment example' or even 'architecture' documents, 
and, at the end, I am not sure it is really what was really suggested.

I understood (stop me as soon as I write something wrong), it was 
suggested to concentrate on documents (let's call them 'applicability 
documents') that answer the following requirements:

- Each document SHOULD address only one specific 'technique' (not sure 
about this word), e.g.: feedback mechanisms, SPIT policies, any 
individual solution building blocks that are discussed in RFC 5039, ...
- Documents SHOULD NOT discuss the techniques themselves: they should 
only reference state of the art specs / publications and so on...
- They SHOULD describe/give the full applicability description of the 
technique, in particular:
* are there some specific deployment hypothesis lying underneath the 
technique?
* what use case(s) does it address?
* Is the addressed use case something that is (already, or likely to be) 
a real threat? (if possible quantify, or give a concrete example)
* Why the standardization of the technique would improve the situation?
* What happens if not standardized?
* What is the likelihood of being used/deployed?
* How could that technique become obsolete (this to address the concern 
about 'SPAM keeps changing', but I don't know if it is clear written 
like this...),

- Usefull content (forgetting the draft template) SHOULD NOT be more 
than 2 pages (not sure about this one too ;-)).

Output of all these documents in the context of an exploratory group 
should be a WG charter proposal...
Is it the correct direction?

Thomas

_______________________________________________
Rucus mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:48:46 -0400

What you say below captures my understanding of what we discussed and 
hummed in favor of.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   499 Thornall St.
Cisco Fellow                                   Edison, NJ 08837
Cisco, Voice Technology Group
[email-masked]
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (408) 902-3084
http://www.cisco.com
_______________________________________________
Rucus mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus