Re: Running code, take 2

Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 13 December 2012 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <yaronf.ietf@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 366AC21F88F4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:52:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wPRODajlpXds for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-f44.google.com (mail-la0-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A1121F8774 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:52:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f44.google.com with SMTP id d3so1807253lah.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:52:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Rx0eCmtJWrx0kRVwn6CvYJVLFvNMf5jC3sgkkwJPC7M=; b=tJX/LowKJlEOR5Pep5CWLqhOGZAD58MsMoPOeF4emqlZPVhTGFNv6fXLviZIbGOmN9 SrGHArjM1c8fFiTWU215Jy59AYH2AIpRbg+/b7IqM8fWnteCYY7xdGahmpB03KcosUYL fy52xb6UnKlOXay/wOpu2E5xzu7/O6dY9H1sH7NqfOoHLqbG6/2ZmLLj5DNrjJ0YqRcm YYXNZl+H1uBRJGfL4hWemPJwIfs86kXhSH6N8NU7p46RiUvwg/w9oLnwg3pYsItXsQU1 X4TaYJwTHvbb7Cv7fKYdwMXEyuJD5kTeIEDUALUF3Mlq9es3ynJRy+i0muvwQ9ZldaaX wSWw==
Received: by 10.152.112.36 with SMTP id in4mr263226lab.35.1355410366094; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:52:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.13] (85-250-110-45.bb.netvision.net.il. [85.250.110.45]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hu6sm749210lab.13.2012.12.13.06.52.40 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:52:44 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50C9EBB3.5040901@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:52:35 +0200
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
Subject: Re: Running code, take 2
References: <50C8DB78.3080905@gmail.com> <50C9DED7.8060604@tana.it> <006601cdd93c$6f9f7a00$4ede6e00$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <006601cdd93c$6f9f7a00$4ede6e00$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, 'Alessandro Vesely' <vesely@tana.it>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:52:53 -0000

Hi Adrian,

I would suggest to start with my proposal, because it requires zero 
implementation effort. If this catches on, I see a lot of value in your 
proposal.

Please also note that the "implementation status" section (according to 
my proposal) is not "frozen" when published as an RFC, rather it is 
deleted. RFCs are forever, and I think a point-in-time implementation 
status is not appropriate in an RFC.

Thanks,
	Yaron

On 12/13/2012 04:16 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> I'm interested in this idea.
>
> However, I note that an "implementation status" section of a document is frozen
> in time when a document goes to RFC.
>
> I wonder whether we could leverage our tools and do something similar to IPR
> disclosures. That is, provide a semi-formal web page where implementation
> details could be recorded and updated. These would then be searchable and linked
> to from the tools page for the I-D / RFC.
>
> They could record the document version that has been implemented, and also allow
> space for other notes.
>
> Adrian (Just thinking aloud)
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Alessandro Vesely
>> Sent: 13 December 2012 13:58
>> To: ietf@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: Running code, take 2
>>
>> On Wed 12/Dec/2012 20:31:04 +0100 Yaron Sheffer wrote:
>>>
>>> I have just published a draft that proposes an alternative to
>>> Stephen's "fast track". My proposal simply allows authors to document,
>>> in a semi-standard way, whatever implementations exist for their
>>> protocol, as well as their interoperability.
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-sheffer-running-code-00.txt
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I am looking forward to comments and discussion on this list.
>>
>> As an occasional I-D reader, I'd appreciate "Implementation Status"
>> sections, including IPR info.  I don't think anything forbids to add
>> such sections, if the authors wish.  I'd add a count of the number of
>> I-Ds that actually have it among the experiment's success criteria.
>