Re: bettering open source involvement
Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Tue, 02 August 2016 07:10 UTC
Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8C2127078 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 00:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 K1wE-fRmfMzm for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 00:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x233.google.com (mail-io0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A958512B004 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 00:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x233.google.com with SMTP id b62so204543054iod.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZlUqHSVDSD6PPLSPh7Ajup3lGtms+sJmJgtHQjvmckk=; b=QTyHkWMUVoGIKec6/BB4HO9ymjuH+1cJNSM1T1tWw+nE/0BwnB7KI69QdszKjPvL+C S2yJCqRBSJ1/t8ld69zAgeyHAKRo0w+GnOXEbd6z4lcxP8E4/x8gREkjTtlYhqr2pw4H 1H1HlYpDc0VyPydNJoiOWKmYDlLIre0tOzsX42YS2FtkE+eaFZUIEadVmck3gMDIeWgv vseO2ri1iJYB71NQkKOR0R3mwIXpSdg/I94O7XJfxMHdAPssTsnpuPqgjRA8biONTdxa m3LURUlnmEYnxiikKcCgiXiF3Hal0lW2L/bPsAR7V2VFVHYRWlUtnW5Q1G86oDJDs4Rx zB5w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZlUqHSVDSD6PPLSPh7Ajup3lGtms+sJmJgtHQjvmckk=; b=IXz1+eSZOCt6qQYmWjy41WBNt7c+UH1eHVvpylrNTltlB1YfdjttngeEA2j3IN2PM+ xccn8ux/o/12W1ULa2cj2kLuNrfb/I2qoZ769oIdol0aAnbqydBkUnWiKIdo09OAr0ya T5iYWS513J6vdVYjhJNGy1+R9KsEdnq9koJDBkV5DQgfzrVH2eWjsqEcSatELVLafGQH AHkFLlaz1PagHaTm5tKY9s8lPxosgpOa6Jejdl8l8rtct58+u53mK1qZncF5ynYdIEc/ 8BvxbL9Pvt1jBBfHOkeKEmrQvQs50TkwuuddsYRQTbgcMdTeNwKx+YeMZqAxTouc/8Gg JG9A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoout3Z26klrpADkUDl8GLuDvDouE/QC48atsme0RRJKR7jXRTD0Q2p+o3CPDRwZMvlX+WXPKIafaDpa8lUA==
X-Received: by 10.107.8.94 with SMTP id 91mr57631669ioi.86.1470121834884; Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:10:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.79.14.17 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 00:10:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <52FD39F9-6362-4C1D-BCCE-40A4DFC65EA0@netapp.com>
References: <CAA93jw71iUPb4vuFK5sMqo_CQEE9HSkchc9988=98FKUsv_1sw@mail.gmail.com> <579A6B76.70303@alvarezp.org> <ADB1E7FD-115C-40DF-97BA-618CFBB1C0EF@cable.comcast.com> <52FD39F9-6362-4C1D-BCCE-40A4DFC65EA0@netapp.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 09:10:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CAA93jw5sHVshuvs85bE64Suqhv0aAZMZUV=_L0Vw2+b3W_FvNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bettering open source involvement
To: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Gtco1i_mwTifYMjNzSLKUrB7ksg>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 07:10:37 -0000
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Eggert, Lars <lars@netapp.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 2016-08-01, at 15:44, Livingood, Jason <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com> wrote: >> What if, in some future state, a given working group had a code repository and the working group was chartered not just with developing the standards but maintaining implementations of the code? > > as an addition to developing specs, that might be useful, if the spec remains the canonical standards output. > > "Go read the code" is not a useful answer if the code comes under a license (such as GPL) that taints the developer. (This is a major reason what we are doing IETF specs for DCTCP and CUBIC - so that they can be implemented without needing to read Linux kernel code.) Only 10 (?) years after full support for cubic entered the linux kernel, and 3 after dctcp. If you define the efforts of this standards body as one to produce BSD licensed code (which is basically the case), it will continue to lag behind the bleeding edge and continue to become more and more irrelevant. It's not just the deployed code in kernels that is a problem, it is also that the best of the tools available to prototype new network code are GPL'd. NS3, for example, is gpl. The routing protocols incorporated in bird and quagga are GPL. Bind is BSD, but nominum is proprietary and dnsmasq, GPLd. There is increasingly no place to design, develop, and test new stuff without starting from a gpl base. Worse, what happens here at ietf without use of these tools, is that we end up with non-open-source code's experiments and results being presented, without any means for an independent experimenter to verify, reproduce, or extend. I think it would do a lot of semantic good if the ietf would stop referring to "open source"[1] and always refer directly to the licenses under which the code it works on that are allowed. There are certainly new areas of interest like npv, etc, that are proceeding with more vendor-friendly code licensing schemes, although I am dubious about the performance benefits of moving all this stuff into userspace, particularly when a seeming, primary, goal is to avoid making free software, rather than engineering a good, clean, correct engineering solution. It has been my hope that since the alice decision re patents (80% of disputed software patents being invalidated), the rise of organizations offering patent pool protections like the open inventions network, and I think (IANAL), that apis cannot be copyrighted in google vs oracle - ends up meaning that a developer can not longer be polluted merely by looking at GPL'd code once in a while. Because we do. The actual implementations of anything for anything else will tend to vary so much due to API differences, and the expressible logic in the algorithms themselves generally simple, that, particularly when the authors of the code have presented it for standardization, under any license, that the exposure to further risk is minimized. There are powerful advantages to the GPL (and LGPL[2]) over "standardization". Notably there is an implicit patent grant, and ongoing maintenance is enforced by an equal spirit of co-operation. It's a better starting point than to hang with a sword of Damocles over your head wondering if someone will patent something out from under you. I wish we could just get on with making the internet a better place. > Lars [1] The GPL is a considered an acceptable license under the terms of the open source inititatives: https://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical [2] Of all the open source licenses out there, I happen to like the LGPLv2 the best. It is only viral if you make changes to the library. -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org
- Re: bettering open source involvement Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Harald Alvestrand
- Re: bettering open source involvement ned+ietf
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Ted Lemon
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement joel jaeggli
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Summary: bettering open source involvement S Moonesamy
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Philip Homburg
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Ted Lemon
- Re: bettering open source involvement Yoav Nir
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Eggert, Lars
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Doug Ewell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Eggert, Lars
- Re: bettering open source involvement Paul Wouters
- Re: bettering open source involvement Joel M. Halpern
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Livingood, Jason
- Re: bettering open source involvement Livingood, Jason
- Re: bettering open source involvement Livingood, Jason
- Re: bettering open source involvement Ted Lemon
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement HANSEN, TONY L
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Andy Bierman
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Bjoern A. Zeeb
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement S Moonesamy
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Octavio Alvarez
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Suzanne Woolf
- Re: bettering open source involvement Bjoern A. Zeeb
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- bettering open source involvement Dave Taht