IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notifica

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notifica

RE: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notification delivery methodby July 7

From: Carl-Uno Manros (carl@manros.com)
Date: Wed Jun 28 2000 - 22:28:57 EDT

  • Next message: Hugo Parra: "RE: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notification delivery methodby July 7"

    Hugo,

    I see your point, but I don't want to change the rules again. What I intend
    to do is to count the 0000-ids as a separate category; if we end up having
    more people in that group than in the one that has allocated their 4 points,
    we have a clear answer. Nobody's voice will go unheard...

    Carl-Uno

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Hugo Parra [mailto:HPARRA@novell.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 7:15 PM
    > To: cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com; carl@manros.com; pmoore@peerless.com
    > Cc: ipp@pwg.org
    > Subject: RE: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notification delivery
    > methodby July 7
    >
    >
    > Shouldn't the options be ...
    >
    > a) over email
    > b) over IPP (a.k.a. intelligent polling)
    > c) over INDP (new IPP-like protocol, but works in the opposite
    > direction)
    > d) over SNMP
    > e) don't mandate any
    >
    > Otherwise those who give each entry a weight of zero, basically
    > through away their vote.
    >
    > -Hugo
    >
    > >>> "Carl-Uno Manros" <carl@manros.com> 06/28/00 07:52PM >>>
    > Oh no, I managed to not be completely clear after all.
    >
    > The weighting is for the IETF standards texts.
    >
    > What gets tested in the bake-off is the decision of the PWG,
    > which hosts the
    > bake-off event, and has nothing to do with this exercise.
    >
    > Carl-Uno
    >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: owner-ipp@pwg.org [mailto:owner-ipp@pwg.org]On Behalf Of
    > > pmoore@peerless.com
    > > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 5:47 PM
    > > To: Manros, Carl-Uno B
    > > Cc: IETF-IPP
    > > Subject: Re: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notification delivery method
    > > by July 7
    > >
    > >
    > > If this is a vote for making things mandatory :-
    > >
    > > 0 a) over email
    > > 0 b) over IPP (a.k.a. intelligent polling)
    > > 0 c) over INDP (new IPP-like protocol, but works in the opposite
    > > direction)
    > > 0 d) over SNMP
    > >
    > > I dont think mandating is useful
    > >
    > > If this is a vote for 'what specs do we need to agree and bakeoff ASAP'
    > >
    > > 2 a) over email
    > > 0 b) over IPP (a.k.a. intelligent polling)
    > > 2 c) over INDP (new IPP-like protocol, but works in the opposite
    > > direction)
    > > 0 d) over SNMP
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Manros, Carl-Uno B" <cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com> on 06/28/2000
    > 05:17:16 PM
    > >
    > > To: IETF-IPP <ipp@pwg.org>
    > > cc: (bcc: Paul Moore/AUCO/US)
    > >
    > > Subject: IPP> ADM - Pick your favorite notification delivery
    > > method by July 7
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > All,
    > >
    > > The IETF does not do voting, but we can ask people to allocate
    > weights to
    > > their favorite method. From the result I hope to get a picture of
    > > whether we
    > > have a clear "rough consensus" favorite, or if we should just
    > avoid trying
    > > to make any particular notification delivery method the "required" or
    > > "mandated" one.
    > >
    > > So let the weightings begin!
    > >
    > > Here are the rules:
    > >
    > > 1) We have 4 candidate notification delivery methods, briefly
    > > described as:
    > >
    > > a) over email
    > > b) over IPP (a.k.a. intelligent polling)
    > > c) over INDP (new IPP-like protocol, but works in the opposite
    > direction)
    > > d) over SNMP
    > >
    > > 2) You have a total of maximum 4 weight points to allocate between the 4
    > > methods above.
    > >
    > > a) You can put all your 4 points on one favorite and leave the
    > > other three
    > > with 0 each. (the 'all eggs in one basket' option)
    > > b) If you don't really mind which method, you can give 1 point
    > to each of
    > > the methods. (the 'chicken' option)
    > > c) You can allocate your 4 points somewhere between the two
    > extreme cases
    > > above. (the 'diplomatic' options)
    > > d) If you don't want to make ANY of the methods "required" or
    > "mandated",
    > > put a 0 for ALL four methods! (the 'don't even try it' option)
    > >
    > > If you still haven't understood the rules, please read the above
    > > text 3 more
    > > times, before you make a fool of yourself....., or of me for not
    > > being clear
    > > enough ;-{
    > >
    > > So please collect your wits and send your weights to the IPP DL no later
    > > than next Friday July 7!
    > >
    > > Have fun.... and remember that if you do not participate you cannot win!
    > >
    > > Carl-Uno
    > >
    > > Carl-Uno Manros
    > > Principal Engineer - Xerox Architecture Center - Xerox Corporation
    > > 701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
    > > Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
    > > Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 28 2000 - 22:37:07 EDT