[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] The New "organisation object" Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hans Petter Holen
hpholen at tiscali.no
Fri Aug 29 19:52:37 CEST 2003
> 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. Maybe we should adapt this kind of procedure ? At some time prior to making the plan LOIs are circulated to the list/members for support. When there is sufficient support for the proposal it will be included in the activity plan The result would be a RIPE NCC activity plan established trough comunity consensus rather than the RIPE NCC management proposed activity plan. -hph
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Incident Response Service (IRS) [was: Unneeded RIPE tasks] (fwd)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] The New "organisation object" Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]