Subject: [homenet] Brian Haberman's Abstain on draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-10: (with COMMENT)

From: "Brian Haberman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 05:39:50 -0700

Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-homenet-dncp-10: Abstain

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-homenet-dncp/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

After spending a bunch of time reviewing the DISCUSS and COMMENT points
made by all the IESG members and having several in-depth discussion with
other IETF participants, I am abstaining on this document. I believe the
concept of an "abstract protocol specification" does not align with the
IETF's goal of generating clear and inter-operable protocol
specifications. This approach requires an implementer to resolve
differences between the abstract protocol specification and the profile
rather than simply implementing a single protocol specification. Such an
approach has a higher probability of error than the single specification
approach. If the basic premise of a protocol is sound and applicable for
other uses, a new protocol specification can be written that borrows the
necessary part from the previous protocol and makes any requisite changes
for the new use.

Given this, I will not support the publication of this draft, but I will
not stand in its way given the perceived rough consensus for it.