Re: "professional" in an IETF context

[Miles Fidelman <[e-mail]>]

Masataka Ohta wrote:
> Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>>> And the goal should be to prevent IETF perform meaningless 
>>> engineering such as development of stupid protocols, including but
>>> not limited to, IPv6 and LISP.
>
>> Now THIS seems like a living example of something that is both 
>> unprofessional AND uncivil.
>
> Thank you very much for clarifying that requiring to be "professional"
> or "civil" means prohibiting fair criticism against poor engineering
> results.
I can't speak to LISP (other than the language, which is just plain 
brilliant).  But a lot of good engineering went into IPv6 (speaking as 
an outside observer) - calling it "meaningless" and "stupid" is both 
uncivil and unprofessional - certainly in print.  (In a design review, 
in context, "that's just plain moronic, on the face of it" - might be 
considered both civil, and professional).

Miles Fidelman



-- 
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