More on requirements

[Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>]

I'm being heavy on process here and light on technical
content, and I'll apologize in advance for that.  After last
week's sessions I'm very concerned about the working group's
ability to make progress, and as an application consumer of
IPSec services it matters to me a lot.

Cheryl's document is really, really useful, doing a 
particularly good job of framing the issues that need to be
resolved and presenting the scoping question much more
clearly than I've seen elsewhere.  However, in its current
form it's not really a requirements documents.  Requirements
documents need to present, uh, requirements and not a whole
lot more.  I know the question of splitting the document in
two has come up before and I think it's a very good idea.
FWIW, I think that the sacred requirements document provides
a pretty good example of laying out requirements clearly while
still providing some discussion.

Melinda