pausable explanation for the Document Series

Bound, Jim Jim.Bound at
Sat Jun 7 23:52:43 CEST 2003

And what bugs are permitted and not permitted and why we made those
trade-offs when sending to the AD should be done.  If the AD don't agree
have them relay clearly why they think the WG is wrong and come to the
mail list.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: john.loughney at [mailto:john.loughney at] 
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 1:15 AM
> To: hinden at; harald at
> Cc: problem-statement at
> Subject: RE: pausable explanation for the Document Series
> Hi Bob,
> > >The more-core problem is industry running on protocols with design 
> > >flaws
> > >and protocol bugs, which cannot be fixed because of the 
> installed base.
> > >
> > >If PS was perfect, this would not be a serious problem. 
> But it isn't 
> > >so.
> > 
> > First versions of anything are never perfect.  This is true for 
> > products
> > and standards.  As long as we try to solve the problem by 
> trying to make 
> > the first version perfect we will fail.  It only delays the 
> first version 
> > and causes it to miss the market need.  The only solution I 
> know of is to 
> > do new versions.  This seems to work well in industry.
> > 
> > Perfection doesn't work.  Shipping products and getting bug
> > reports works.
> I agree with you on this point.  Until someone writes an ascii to 
> C (or your favorite coding language) to convert I-Ds to 
> running code, it'll be impossible to ensure that a PS does 
> not have bugs.  A more sensible way forward, in my opinion, would be 
> to ensure a better way for bug reporting, document updating, 
> etc. I think Harald's maintainence teams is a good potential solution.
> John

More information about the Problem-statement mailing list