Re: Running Code

[Andy Bierman <andy at netconfcentral.com>]

Masataka Ohta wrote:
> 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.

I disagree.
It means the specification is implementable.

Since the goal of our work is to produce specifications
that will allow multiple independent implementations to
inter-operate successfully, I can think of no more valuable
review input towards this goal than comments from implementers.

I think adequate procedures exist for gathering implementation
experience for the IESG to evaluate protocol interoperability.


> 						Masataka Ohta

Andy