IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dsfjdssdfsd] what not to do...

Alexandre Carmel-Veilleux <acv@miniguru.ca> Wed, 02 April 2014 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.carmel@miniguru.ca>
X-Original-To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E05121A03A2 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 11:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0HeOsOYSWSEY for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 11:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-f180.google.com (mail-we0-f180.google.com [74.125.82.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26AE81A0374 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 11:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f180.google.com with SMTP id p61so662667wes.39 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Apr 2014 11:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Gj0Ysd0QzEnLocxePtD1nVR5xzlWBFdwtTTpVa8EKTM=; b=UfdCDCRPsWKvGnjhiuq4y6Y+3pTKcD2apqoUANYGi1K/enMCMes96H8MvznCTFh0Um zePFOVmqGr3LVQaHdONmRVOI7ZlsqseEP4c82YVEwJYmeqH5xLBJi5nYMna/D4HLN+hA M8CRBVM/AdyTmihHeeKBE7gwgRVzo6Q0fplQDLoY02HqfgEzLhqMAWfoOPDOPEqdNYj1 TvIitp8bK6r++IPWemGHph43uNUxXj8xQw8aucq7WvvyNKWD1Td8mpp++k9DynpMNa2h P41X+GxjpYvseJ78P32slMpy+/TpSBLtnExpkKynPEa4uPm4ggTOUOxo+1AhQbII8L5G iZpg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl4pIVXTZHGKk5MSnR9CB2kONhd2i7BKz4DvTVKcB3+ZjuMs7f32ETwv9xFPjELIbqzZ61a
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.182.166 with SMTP id ef6mr4077937wic.29.1396463449678; Wed, 02 Apr 2014 11:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: alexandre.carmel@miniguru.ca
Received: by 10.194.173.168 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 11:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [67.69.227.99]
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEGgyThpjidy3E4drtJC4Y0c2R3uxEDuq7p8Mjcj2GKX1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <533AF317.5070901@cs.tcd.ie> <CACXcFm=ts6JWuW+pQtaqZ720QDxnEa22UZW2NiBYMgCCV7MPuw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEF8N5C7zmGh5TBnp29zP1Fi2PMzoU4x4EEH8hY82PnS0w@mail.gmail.com> <CACsn0c=x3K3NDHve3sKvaFuk_08Xp+wepPN=nkj00bLKNyOK0A@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEGgyThpjidy3E4drtJC4Y0c2R3uxEDuq7p8Mjcj2GKX1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 14:30:49 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: tLITUhQfxIk8iFnvz-fJbLQ2yH4
Message-ID: <CACzep8KWqPfsTjh70CuyOgG-un0fwKOJZqumb8BsqNJiqm3b+A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexandre Carmel-Veilleux <acv@miniguru.ca>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e016347fcdc3d4a04f6137b62"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dsfjdssdfsd/Jf7VKzkkp7nKgZU_uSjAQjYJGEE
Cc: "dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org" <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>, Sandy Harris <sandyinchina@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [dsfjdssdfsd] what not to do...
X-BeenThere: dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The dsfjdssdfsd list provides a venue for discussion of randomness in IETF protocols, for example related to updating RFC 4086." <dsfjdssdfsd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dsfjdssdfsd>, <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dsfjdssdfsd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dsfjdssdfsd>, <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:32:57 -0000

Hi,

On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> We had this same discussion before RFC 1750 and before RFC 4086. I
> would agree that it should emphasize the right thing to do more than
> it emphasizes the wrong thing to do. And I'd be fine with relegating
> what not to do to an appendix or something. But I'm not willing to
> dump the information from the draft about what not to do.


I totally agree.

A list of known bad practices can provide ammunition to the poor software
engineers out there to convince management that fixing the RNG in $PRODUCT
is warranted. Deviance from current best practices is often not enough to
sell software development with no revenue potential to MBA types.

My 2 cents from working for an enterprise software vendor.

Alex

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email