[rrg] Consensus call: Reject proposed strategy F?

[Joel M. Halpern]

Just commenting on one point on the list.

William Herrin wrote:
> Anyway, I'm trying to break the strategies into three sets:
> 
> 1. Ideas which show significant promise.
> 2. Ideas that it's time to stop taking seriously.
> 3. All the rest, which we can reconsider if #1 doesn't pan out.
> 
> I'm tackling #2 first in the hopes of focusing the discussion when we
> look at #1.
> 
> I say we should tell the folks in GROW that it's time to stop
> seriously entertaining the idea that vanilla BGP (strategy F) will
> work out ok. What do you say?

Firstly, given that there are useful things to do with BGP, that will 
extend its life, I don't think it would at all be appropriate to tell 
GROW not to put energy into engineering improvements.  They are focussed 
on what the short term problems are, and the easily engineerable fixes 
(often just in terms of BCPs, such as Paul's FIB tricks.)

Secondly, "give up" (strategy F) is largely orthogonal to the question 
of what GROW does about the immediate problems  The question in that 
regard is whether there are useful longer term things for us to be 
working on (whether those are LISP, Six/One, or Host based communication 
identities, or something else.)  I personally think that there are 
definitely still avenues worth exploring, and still things to be learned 
by such exploration.  But whether there are or not has nothing to do 
with any "message" we "tell the folks in GROW".

Thirdly, it is almost never effective to tell some other group "stop." 
So I am glad I don't think that is a useful activity.

Joel