Subject: [hybi] requirements editor.

From: Greg Wilkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 12:31:22 +0200

All,

I appear to be out of step with the majority of voices
on this list.

When I was asked to be the editor, I responded that
I would be seen as too partisan to facilitate
reaching consensus.    But I was urged to give it
a try anyway.

But my attempts to make some progress on the requirements
have invariably been cast in the light of the ongoing
debate about the details of the protocol.
I don't see any evidence that my efforts are helping
us move forwards at all, nor that there is any actual
interest in having a meaningful requirements document.

I thus resign as editor of the requirements document
and urge some neutral voice to step forward to take
the role.

cheers

---

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 23:23:02 -0700

Hi Greg,
>reaching consensus.    But I was urged to give it

It's not a matter of being out of step with the majority of 
voices.  There is a lack of interest in producing a requirements 
document.  Combined with the discussions about items that are not 
part of the working group current deliverables, it becomes a recipe 
for failure.

>interest in having a meaningful requirements document.

Given the current trend, it is doubtful that the requirements 
document would be meaningful.  As the Working Group has to produce 
such a document anyway, it could turn into documenting the 
requirements after the fact.

>and urge some neutral voice to step forward to take

I don't think that it would be much of a difference as it is a few 
months too late to fix the problem (see 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg02005.html ).

Regards,
-sm