Re: Running Code

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

 



Scott Lawrence wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 13:17 -0800, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>> I would like to bring to your attention this proposal to put back
>> running code at the center of Internet protocol design by adding a
>> new Considerations Section in future Internet-Drafts and RFCs:
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-petithuguenin-running-code-considerations-00.txt
> 
> I oppose the addition of such a mandatory or formalized section, despite
> the fact that I very much support measuring specification quality and
> community support by looking for running code.
> 
> I oppose even more this part of the definition of "running code":
> 
>         The minimum rights that should be granted for this source code
>         are the right to duplicate it for purpose of reading it and the
>         right to execute it or generate the binary code to execute it.
> 
> I spend nearly all my time and energy these days on open source
> software, so this would not be a barrier for me, but it would be for
> many people whose contributions are important.

It seems that there is a general misunderstanding that this draft
asks for mandatory source implementation.  This is not the case, and
this will be better explained in the next version of the draft.

What this draft ask for is to be mandatory to list in a specific
section the names, authors and sponsors of early implementations
available in source form.  Everything that does not fall under the
definition can still be acknowledged as it is now (or not) in the
normal Acknowledgement section.  And if there is no early source
implementation, then the section is empty.  The only burden for the
I-D author is to add an entry in the section when an implementer
sends a reference.  The burden for the RFC editor is to remove the
URLs and eventually the whole section if empty before publication as
RFC.  That's it.  On the other hand this give to reviewers an idea
of the complexity needed to implement it and a way to evaluate
corner cases, security issues and other "details" that will plague
the future production implementations, etc...


-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Home: marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Work: petithug@xxxxxxx
_______________________________________________

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

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