[ncc-services-wg] Incident Response Service (IRS) [was: Unneeded RIPE tasks] (fwd)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Incident Response Service (IRS) [was: Unneeded RIPE tasks] (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Incident Response Service (IRS) [was: Unneeded RIPE tasks] (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE-NCC)
henk at ripe.net
Mon Aug 25 10:35:39 CEST 2003
Dear Hank, > > > 2) is there any WG which could be polled or which has "adopted" this > > > activity for definition and development (or is expected to do so)? > > > > As soon as the AP2004 is approved, we (Daniel K and myself) will write an > > implementation document, describing the activities proposed under section > > 5 in more detail.This document will be circulated to, I'd guess, the > > services-WG and discussed there. > > And you do not see this a procedurally wrong? Wherever I work, whenever > they want to do "something new", they need to write it up fully, indicate > the budget and manpower needed and then submit to management. Based on > that info, management can make an intelligent decision. I've seen this approach. I've also worked at places where the LOI/TDR approach was used: the first document ("Letter of Intent") gave a global outline of the activity, goals, deadlines, costs, manpower, etc. Only when this was approved, a second document ("Technical Design Report") was written discussing all the details. I personally believe that this approach makes much more sense, why waste time/money to work out details _before_ there is consensus that the activity should be persued in the first place. > Instead, we have 1 paragraph describing what will be done in general and > once the AP2004 is approved based on that, only then do we find out how > much all this cost. This is not correct. There is indeed only one paragraph in the AP2004, due to space constraints. However, there is also the strategy paper: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/hostcount.html with more details about the IS activity. This paper was discussed at RIPE45 and people have been invited to comment on this document on the tt-wg at ripe.net list. Then the proposed budget: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/budget2004-aoa97.html and http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/budget2004-aoa03.html does contain an estimated budget for this activity. If you have any specific questions about the 2 documents mentioned above, I suggest that we take them to the tt-wg at ripe.net list. Henk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal at ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre WWW: http://www.ripe.net/home/henk P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ That problem that we weren't having yesterday, is it better? (Big ISP NOC)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Incident Response Service (IRS) [was: Unneeded RIPE tasks] (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Incident Response Service (IRS) [was: Unneeded RIPE tasks] (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]