Re: musings

braden@isi.edu Thu, 16 May 1996 19:14 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22275; 16 May 96 15:14 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22271; 16 May 96 15:14 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00998; 16 May 96 15:14 EDT
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA02487>; Thu, 16 May 1996 11:54:55 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA02481>; Thu, 16 May 1996 11:54:54 -0700
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA09635>; Thu, 16 May 1996 11:54:53 -0700
Received: from can.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA02477>; Thu, 16 May 1996 11:54:53 -0700
Date: Thu, 16 May 96 11:54:57 PDT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: braden@isi.edu
Posted-Date: Thu, 16 May 96 11:54:57 PDT
Message-Id: <9605161854.AA25129@can.isi.edu>
Received: by can.isi.edu (4.1/4.0.3-6) id <AA25129>; Thu, 16 May 96 11:54:57 PDT
To: braden@isi.edu, fred@cisco.com
Subject: Re: musings
Cc: rreq@isi.edu
X-Orig-Sender: owner-rreq@isi.edu
Precedence: bulk

Fred,

The dilemma that you describe is exactly the reason why one has to
be somewhat philosophical about standardizing comprehensive AS's
like HR and rreq.

It is important to have a requirements spec as a shining
city on the hill, an Ideal towards which all strive, even if the
pragmatics of the real-world prevent absolute full compliance.
I think in retrospect that the HR RFCs did a great deal of good,
even though few if any vendors ever followed ALL its requirements
strictly.  I also think that real-world forces make it important for
such a document to be a full standard; otherwise, it is too easy for
non-technical people to dismiss it.

So, my personal recommendation would be to back off from your
(laudable) desire for demonstrated interoperability for
rreq, and GET ON WITH IT.

Bob