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 1FAVSh-0002Si-Bi; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 12:01:35 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAUzu-0002AL-81 for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:31:50 -0500
Received: from [156.154.16.129] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAUYK-0002Vo-ES for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:03:20 -0500
Received: from colibri.verisign.com ([65.205.251.74]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FASuj-0000GK-8S for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:18:21 -0500
Received: from MOU1WNEXCN03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer6.verisign.com [65.205.251.33]) by colibri.verisign.com (8.13.1/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1IEIKOF011408; Sat, 18 Feb 2006 06:18:20 -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 06:18:19 -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 06:18:18 -0800
Message-ID: <198A730C2044DE4A96749D13E167AD3792A99D@MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: What's an experiment?
Thread-Index: AcYybYKhIDZBk+VqROGs79G2zBmWAgCJfj9w
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
To: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>, ietf@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Feb 2006 14:18:19.0655 (UTC) FILETIME=[2AECF970:01C63496]
X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007
Cc:
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 Frank Ellermann

> Intentionally disrupting other running experiments or 
> breaking standards is also dubious.  

Not necessarily.

One of the most important uses of Experimental is to document the
minority position when a working group gets its cranium embedded in its
posterior. In a significant number of cases the minority position has
turned out to be right.

In a consensus based organization it is very easy for a minority to
prevent any change in the status quo simply by filibustering the
proposed change. This is not a good thing when the status quo is failure
to deploy for a decade or more.

Experimental is also an essential safeguard to prevent the game of a WG
with an unsuccessful protocol finding other groups to inflict it on.
Given the impressive lack of success of BEEP vs SOAP it would be much
better for the IESG to formally recognize that this attempt to ratify a
'me too' protocol in 9 months has backfired and is now harming IETF Web
Services efforts.

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