Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050807221135.05718d90@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:32:38 +0200
To: Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>,
	grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <42F6482C.10408@cisco.com>
References: <200508062307.TAA18855@ietf.org> <42F602C0.9070908@cisco.com>
	<42F60650.7060701@swin.edu.au> <42F6482C.10408@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Why have we gotten away from running code?
Precedence: list
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Melinda,
Fully true. When you consider it, instead of talking of "running code" we 
should in fact talk of "used code". BCP are becoming the architectural key 
because they document the brainware: the way people use the technology to 
network together. Real experimentation needs to therefore be carried "live" 
on the Internet. ICANN called for this kind of experimentation by the 
global internet community, and defined its terms (ICP-3 document in 2001).

ICP-3 suggests that IETF shares in organising this experimentation. I 
repeatedly recalled it, but the comment I usually received was that it is 
not the role of IETF. We organised a test bed for two years with people 
from many places. Based upon this first experience, a new and more simply 
organised network test bed project is underway, open to all (Unitry). All 
the cooperations are welcome: the target is a mailing list of participating 
testing teams, with online resources and a charter accepted in common. It 
will be what the participants will make of it.
jfc

At 19:43 07/08/2005, Melinda Shore wrote:
>grenville armitage wrote:
>>I wonder if absence of running code, and the apparently weakened
>>impact of running code on WG debate when there is some, is contributing
>>to drawn-out document development?
>
>That's an excellent point.  To a great extent
>we suffer from what the FreeBSD community calls
>"bikeshed" 
>(http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/misc.html#BIKESHED-PAINTING)
>and while I think it's excellent that people are
>providing input in areas not exactly their own
>implementation experience can help filter discussion
>and assist the decision-making process.  I'll note
>that just because something's been implemented doesn't
>mean it's a good design (or even a design at all), and
>I wouldn't agree with "always prefer something that's
>been implemented", but I do agree that there's no
>substitute for implementation experience as one input
>into the process.
>
>Melinda
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ietf mailing list
>Ietf@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf