Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [RPRWG] Do you all love the Terms and Definitions Proposed Comment Resolutions?

802.17 WG,
I would like to add a couple things to Bob Love's email on review of T&D
What is most essential  when reviewing the T&D resolutions is that
terminology and associated definitions are consistent with intended usage
in the standard.  While it's true that we can't have perfect closure
on terminology until we complete the rest of the document, the intent is to try
to identify vocabularly that will help drive consistency in
composing the standard.  If you see terminology or definitions that really
strike you the wrong way please let us know.
I would rather see objections stemming from intended
usage rather than knit-picky "I don't quite like the wording of this
definition".  In the end, terms which are not actually part of the document
will be dropped, and terminology will be revised as content and usage
within the standard becomes clearer. 
To those who are either writing, editing, or reviewing
one of the various proposed drafts, I would hope to see adoption
of T&D terms in the proposed drafts or pointing out the required changes.
Bob Sultan and I have already put together a list of terms which we believe
have relevance and usage in the standard and warrant discussion
within the working group.  We may even solicit straw polls
to get majority opinion regarding these definitions.
Please take a look at bs_TDIS_01.pdf regarding these terms
and associated considerations as well as the updated T&D section
for the latest definitions.  The list is also open, so any resolution
objections we receive shall be added to the list.
Robert Castellano
Jedai Broadband Networks
(732) 758-9900 x236
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of RDLove
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:32 PM
To: 802.17
Subject: [RPRWG] Do you all love the Terms and Definitions Proposed Comment Resolutions?

All, I am very concerned about the lack of postings about changes you would like to see to the proposed T&D comment resolution.  Perhaps you have studied the proposed comment resolution and decided that a super job was done.  If so, great.  If not, then we are doing ourselves and 802.17 a disservice with our lack of review and posting of our concerns.  With 253 comments to resolve it is imperative that we review the proposed resolutions ahead of the meeting and get our feedback to the comment resolution group (i.e. by posting our concerns about the comment resolutions to the reflector).  We will not have time at the meeting to consider fresh concerns developed during a reading of the comments at the meeting.  Because we have no time for first looking at comments then, I will propose that our review of the T&D document on Thursday be restricted to comments for which concerns have been reported in writing (or electronically) to Bob and Bob by noon Tuesday.
This document is simple to review.  The hard one will be the draft.  The only way we can maintain our schedule will be if people take review of both the working group documents and the proposed comment resolutions seriously.
We have a great opportunity to move 802.17 ahead on a number of fronts next week.  Let' capitalize on that opportunity.
Best regards,
Robert D. Love
Chair, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle     Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773       Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@xxxxxxxx          Fax: 208 978-1187