Subject: RE: [Rfid] SLRRP -> RRCP?

From: "P. Krishna" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 00:02:00 -0400

________________________________

From: [email-masked] on behalf of Margaret Wasserman
Sent: Wed 7/20/2005 9:05 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Rfid] SLRRP -> RRCP?

Hi All,

I was talking to Scott Barvick off-line, and I made a comment that is
probably better shared with the list...

To avoid later pain/confusion, I think it would be preferable to
change the name of the SLRRP protocol to something that doesn't
contain "marketing" terms like "Simple" or "Lightweight".  The IESG
will not generally approve documents that include those words in the
title or document name, as they are seen as marketing terms, not
engineering terms.

I recently encountered this issue with an IPDVB WG protocol.  See the
comments from David Kessens at:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=11634&rfc_flag=0

We were forced to rename the ULE protocol in the final stages, which
was a bit painful.  Fortunately, we found a reasonable name that
retained the commonly-used ULE acronym, or it would have been worse.

Given that David is one of the area directors for this effort, I
doubt that we can slip a protocol past him that claims to be both
"simple" and "lightweight".

In the interest of avoiding that problem if/when this group becomes a
WG and wants to publish a SLRRP-inspired protocol, I'd suggest that
we rename the protocol now, while it will have less impact on the
effort.

How about "RFID Reader Control Protocol (RRCP)"?  It's not as easily
pronounced, but it is more descriptive.

Margaret
=========================================================

Hi Margaret,

Welcome back! I didn't know that one of the issues @ hand was the name of the protocol? Thats an useful input - but dont you think the discussion regarding renaming can wait till the group is formed? The folks on this mailing list have been working on this protocol since Nov'04, and this is the first time we have heard about this! 

If the name does become a big issue, I would rather not go from one acronym to another one, but just call it Reader Protocol - this way there will not be any confusion.

Thank you,

/Krishna

_______________________________________________
Rfid mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rfid

_______________________________________________
Rfid mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rfid

---

From: Marshall Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:08:17 +0530

> Welcome back! I didn't know that one of the issues @ hand was the  
> name of the protocol? Thats an useful input - but dont you think  
> the discussion regarding renaming can wait till the group is  
> formed? The folks on this mailing list have been working on this  
> protocol since Nov'04, and this is the first time we have heard  
> about this!
>
>

i think margaret raises a valid point, or more accurately two points:  
first, is that it's likely that the name will get changed; and,  
second, that it's probably better to change it earlier tather than  
later.

i think it's reasonable to start worrying about this now... ideally,  
i'd like to see a new name in the charter when it's approved!

/mtr