Re: Running Code

Andy Bierman <andy@netconfcentral.com> Wed, 04 March 2009 15:11 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@netconfcentral.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5530928C373 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:11:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.037, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YlSHnOHx0xTg for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:11:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp127.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp127.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.65.186]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AED083A6C98 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:11:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 78158 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2009 15:11:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (andy@68.120.82.123 with plain) by smtp127.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 2009 15:11:49 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: FQKHIRQVM1kF69rxdOpVlSksdwZELlNodICXQOvoYZGT0kX5LvEP5V8KKk7hJ8BAt3zNDPx6v8pMySHXxsi3gP7OQf3U6cAIGsTzHhFutuTm1MMwImjzgNQMajSRelLGFSnYTW5WXOdBxprWW1fQ65Am
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Message-ID: <49AE9A34.4000308@netconfcentral.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:11:48 -0800
From: Andy Bierman <andy@netconfcentral.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Subject: Re: Running Code
References: <49AD9E53.3040003@acm.org> <49ADA722.601@gmail.com> <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155768B2F6@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <49ADE44B.8080604@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <49ADEC70.3060500@netconfcentral.com> <49ADFEA9.5010809@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <49AE95B5.907@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <49AE95B5.907@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:11:22 -0000

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 3/3/09 9:08 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>> Andy Bierman wrote:
>>
>>> Since the goal of our work is to produce specifications
>>> that will allow multiple independent implementations to
>>> inter-operate successfully,
>> How can you define successful interoperation of implementations?
> 

You gather implementation reports.
You conduct interoperability tests and bake-offs.
This used to happen a lot more, back when advancing
to Draft or Full Standard was considered important.


> IMHO you define it by "running code" -- that is, code which is used to
> run a functioning communications network. For me the canonical example
> is the medium we're using right now: email. In general (there are always
> exceptions!), you don't know or care what email clients people use, what
> email servers they use, whether they retrieve their email using POP or
> IMAP, etc. It just works, at least for the core use cases. And I think
> that's why running code (not just compiling code or functioning code,
> but a working network) is so important.
> 
> Peter
> 

Andy