Re: "professional" in an IETF context

Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> Tue, 02 November 2021 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
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 D69833A0857 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.208
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, NICE_REPLY_A=-3.33, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 DKxxKi0r9tM0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:20:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net (server1.neighborhoods.net [207.154.13.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 105373A0824 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:20:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 861ACCC037 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 12:20:53 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.2 (20081215) (Debian) at neighborhoods.net
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (server1.neighborhoods.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id gJ2sYxItAC8b for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 12:20:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from Miless-MBP.fios-router.home (pool-173-48-222-205.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [173.48.222.205]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C417CC034 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 12:20:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: "professional" in an IETF context
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <8F4B97EA-665F-4A59-B99D-791B4AB9F2F7@yahoo.co.uk> <746C1453-FFB0-46E5-ABF2-8630DC23B959@network-heretics.com> <c3e9fe1b-8e48-a364-9e25-4084dac70889@meetinghouse.net> <3a6bf8ad-5492-0942-a451-6317e8a93705@network-heretics.com> <59c1102c-621c-f454-1265-06285c44ffe0@gmail.com> <e668891e-6426-83c8-3900-558e29469b7a@network-heretics.com> <CADnDZ8-dFYDQqa7vpBVajRWw13PG7i7M1E+s0QhCWyAVEvpqVw@mail.gmail.com> <2841d865-901d-4dc1-d254-ba6e1f0b8c17@meetinghouse.net> <CADnDZ8_Sgvs4HUgKVHWwXmUTX5WKV6jpni-t-xjKvkZ6iokoRQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <ed033f22-5979-9d44-5d05-f10670f4805d@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 12:20:15 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADnDZ8_Sgvs4HUgKVHWwXmUTX5WKV6jpni-t-xjKvkZ6iokoRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------FFEBE0A63D21B08F849D3523"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bEabS1LonU_uht44kNVmxqLJD04>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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 Nov 2021 16:21:01 -0000

Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 4:08 PM Miles Fidelman 
> <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net <mailto:mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>> wrote:
>
>     Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 11:13 PM Keith Moore
>>     <moore@network-heretics.com <mailto:moore@network-heretics.com>>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>         On 10/31/21 3:34 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>
>>         > I repeat my suggestion that s/unprofessional/uncivil/ would
>>         fix the
>>         > document under discussion.
>>
>>         Perhaps it would.   And all other things being equal, a
>>         simpler fix is
>>         attractive.  But I don't know why others seem to insist on
>>         "professional".
>>
>>
>>     The reason mybe that it is thought that only who authors an RFC
>>     is professional.
>>     As years while checking in IETF context, it is seen some new
>>     people IETF motivation can be heard that 'you should write an
>>     RFC', but maybe a better motivation is 'you should work/discuss
>>     with one WG together regarding one milestone for progress.
>>     If the word 'professional' makes confusion it is better to change
>>     it, or define it in the document.
>>     I totally agree with the definition give by Keith, which is in
>>     the beginning of thread, so please add it to the draft.
>>
>>
>     Is that really true, though?  We certainly have a lot of
>     protocols, written by amateurs - some of which have ignored RFCs
>     and led to their own standards processes. Are there not RFCs
>     similarly written by folks with limited experience?  Or is it that
>     "unprofessional" RFCs don't make it past the RFC editorial process?
>
>
> It is true. We all know what we have and what we don't have, but we 
> always want/need better.
>
> AB
Might I ask what "it" you're referring to?


>
>
>     Miles Fidelman
>
>     -- 
>     In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>     In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra
>
> not true,
>
>     Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
>     Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
>     In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
>     nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown
>
> not true,
>
> We only find truth by good discussions and respecting each other, 
> because God is truth and he only guides to the truth.


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown