Re: Running Code

From: Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
To: ietf at ietf.org
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:15:39 +0900
In-reply-to: <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155768B2F6 at mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
References: <49AD9E53.3040003 at acm.org> <49ADA722.601 at gmail.com> <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155768B2F6 at mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>

Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

> I don't see the value of running code quite as others do.

I agree. It was valuable in good old days, when implmenting a protocol
was purely voluntary with no budget.

Existence of multiple independent implementations, then, meant the
protocol was widely accepted by the society.

However, after the overly introduction of standardization engineering
to IETF, people satisfy requirements merely because they are required.

So, existence of required running code does not mean much.

						Masataka Ohta

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Running Code
  - From: Andy Bierman
- Re: Running Code
  - From: Gary E. Miller

References:
- Running Code
  - From: Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: Running Code
  - From: Brian E Carpenter
- RE: Running Code
  - From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip

Prev by Date: RE: Running Code
Next by Date: Re: Running Code
Previous by thread: RE: Running Code
Next by thread: Re: Running Code
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: Running Code

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.