Re: on the value of "running code" (was Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I'd offer that the OSI protocol stack was probably significantly more reviewed than the TCP/IP stack.

At the very least, running code is an empirical proof that an architecture _can_ work.

Rgds,
-drc

On Aug 1, 2007, at 8:35 AM, Eric Burger wrote:
My faulty recollection is that in our game of rock-paper-scissors, Running Code beats Untested Idea, but Well Reviewed Architecture and Protocol beats
Running Code.


On 7/31/07 11:34 PM, "Keith Moore" <moore@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
IMHO, "running code" gets more credit than is warranted. While it is certainly useful as both proof of concept and proof of implementability, mere existence of running code says nothing about the quality of the
design, its security, scalability, breadth of applicability, and so
forth. "running code" was perhaps sufficient in ARPAnet days when there were only a few hundred hosts and a few thousand users of the network.
It's not sufficient for global mission critical infrastructure.


tend to agree.  how about "multiple interoperable implementations"?

that's certainly better than one implementation, especially if
implemented on multiple platforms. though still, I think, this is not
sufficient in general.

again, I'm biased because I've heard too many arguments of the form "we have running code for <deficient protocol>, and it's already (somewhat)
deployed so we have to approve it as a standard without changing it".

Keith


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf




_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]