RE: What's an experiment?

"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com> Sat, 18 February 2006 17:01 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAVSg-0002SL-GC; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 12:01:34 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAUzq-00029T-Ma for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:31:46 -0500
Received: from [156.154.16.129] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAUYV-0002Vo-H6 for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:03:31 -0500
Received: from robin.verisign.com ([65.205.251.75]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FASSB-0008VM-PQ for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 08:48:52 -0500
Received: from MOU1WNEXCN03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer6.verisign.com [65.205.251.33]) by robin.verisign.com (8.13.1/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1IDmoF0018665; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:48:50 -0800
Received: from MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.25.13.157]) by MOU1WNEXCN03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:48:49 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:48:48 -0800
Message-ID: <198A730C2044DE4A96749D13E167AD3792A99C@MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: What's an experiment?
Thread-Index: AcYyT0Qs9OQrgaU4SpG2MlJLjRBs6QCQkI/g
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Feb 2006 13:48:49.0763 (UTC) FILETIME=[0BFCE330:01C63492]
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: What's an experiment?
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

> Behalf Of Eliot Lear

> It would seem to me that the purpose of an experimental RFC 
> is to let people perform and participate in (rather public) 
> experiments on the Internet.  A reasonable standard for 
> "experimental" is that there be a thesis and a procedure so 
> that the experiment can be repeated, observations can be 
> made, and conclusions can be drawn.  The thesis should be 
> clear as to what is being tested, and it should at least pass 
> the laugh test.  Further, the standard for design of the 
> experiment should provide for the least practicable 
> interference with other ongoing operations (experimental or not).

That overlooks the fact that often the protocol is written up after the
experiment, the results of which are described elsewhere.

The main ongoing experiments are of the form: 'I believe that the
protocol approach described in this document to address real deployment
needs better than the WG consensus.'

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf