IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Running code, take 2

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Fri, 14 December 2012 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 9807F21F8AEC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:15:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 9MAHPK20moiB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:15:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBDE21F8AB9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:15:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [198.252.137.115] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1TjeTg-0000lD-LH; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 18:15:36 -0500
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 18:15:31 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Running code, take 2
Message-ID: <C49D02AFB5025BD44B8E1EA1@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <50CAE81A.4040807@gmail.com>
References: <50C8DB78.3080905@gmail.com> <50C9DED7.8060604@tana.it> <006601cdd93c$6f9f7a00$4ede6e00$@olddog.co.uk> <9F862855-15A5-4109-88AE-32AAD7D1C21C@viagenie.ca> <50CA189E.1090002@gmail.com> <m2sj79zuot.wl%randy@psg.com> <50CA4DFA.9050500@gmail.com> <CD38357DE61404E1B49E9B93@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <50CAE81A.4040807@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
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: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 23:15:38 -0000

--On Friday, December 14, 2012 10:49 +0200 Yaron Sheffer
<yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

>... 
> The value in a 3933 experiment is in the Summary Report,
> otherwise I agree it's a waste of time. At the end of the
> period we will have a little bit of data to understand whether
> we have traction for this idea, and whether we should make it
> IETF-wide, allow it to quietly die or explicitly advise
> against it.

I would encourage anyone who believes in "running code" wrt IETF
processes and who is willing to argue that one of the current
proposals should be adopted because there is real value in the
Summary Reports called for by 3933 to compile a list of 

	* 3933 Experiments
	* The published summary reports for each
	* How and where they found those reports.
	
I predict the results will be enlightening.  :-(

   john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email