Re: Last Call: <draft-farrell-ft-03.txt> (A Fast-Track way to RFC with Running Code) to Experimental RFC

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

 



Hi Ned,

On 01/16/2013 03:40 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
>> Actually I think you make a couple of great points that ought be
>> mentioned in the draft about implementability. (No chance you'd
>> have time to craft a paragraph? If not, I'll try pinch text from
>> above:-) Now that you point it out like that, I'm irritated at
>> myself for not having included it already! (It rings bells for me.)
> 
> OK, I think the place for a new paragraph is just before the last
> paragraph of section 2. How about something along the lines of:
> 
>    A complete and correct specification is not in and of itself a guarantee of
>    high quality implementations. What may seem like minor details can
>    increase implementation difficulty substantially, leading to implementations
>    that are fragile, contain unnecessary restrictions, or do not scale well.
>    Implementation experience has the potential to catch these problems before
>    the specification is finalized and becomes difficult to change.
> 
> You might also want to change the final paragraph of the section a bit in
> light of the addition; I'll leave that to you to work out.

Did that, working copy at [1]. Lemme know if there're any changes
that are needed.

I think that's a really good addition, thanks.

S.

[1] http://down.dsg.cs.tcd.ie/misc/draft-farrell-ft-04.txt

> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> 				Ned
> 
> 


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