Re: Accurate history [Re: "professional" in an IETF context]

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Scott O. Bradner wrote:

> see https://www.sobco.com/ipng/big_ten/big_ten_packet_format.txt > for one of the final proposals

It says:

    This document attempts to borrow the best from all of the existing
    IPng proposals (CATNIP, SIPP, TUBA).

which is, as all the real engineers know, the surest way to
lose, though politicians think it the best compromise.

It should also be noted that SIPP is already a union
of SIP and PIP, though Paul Francis, who proposed PIP,
was, in the face of SIPP, saying "PIP is dead".

So, SIPP was developed highly politically, though its
address is still 64bit long.

							Masataka Ohta