|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Some thoughts on 240/4
In a message written on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:24:44PM -0400, [email protected] wrote: > > Why would the 240/4 updates blow the schedule? > > More code, more regression testing, same number of programmers. Do the math. Less code, every patch produced to date /removes/ code. More regression testing, same number of programmes, ok. > Take it as a given that it *will* slip the schedule some amount, because > the resources for a 240/4 feature will have to come from somewhere. So > how much slippage are you willing to accept? Ok, I'll accept a month slippage in IPv6 "features". (What are we still waiting on, anyway?) I also believe that's also about 29 more days than most vendors should need to do the job. -- Leo Bicknell - [email protected] - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - [email protected], www.tmbg.org Attachment:
pgp00020.pgp
|