Re: An IETF repository for working code in our protocols?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 21 August 2020 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB3F3A0CD9 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:50:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CDmq-FZEnua8 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB4FD3A0CB9 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC9738988 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:29:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id IE3LFTP7178C for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:29:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F97C38A0E for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:29:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 737321AA for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:50:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: IETF WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: An IETF repository for working code in our protocols?
In-Reply-To: <5569BEF0-1782-4D93-8BB1-276ECD42D6ED@episteme.net>
References: <CAMMTW_+Di=ZBJFLNPaVK6f3w3Yq-V-qau8G_rfGt96SX_aYAAA@mail.gmail.com> <8193D927-DDA8-4C74-BBD3-1AF6C9AFE98B@mnot.net> <CAMMTW_KVRVaz0tUXLaAQH2V0bY2ws+CZDy=XUKC=Jc3aiAU58w@mail.gmail.com> <5569BEF0-1782-4D93-8BB1-276ECD42D6ED@episteme.net>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:50:10 -0400
Message-ID: <15396.1598028610@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/-6mszTggR5TZkTEyzRpAZO3fxOI>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 16:50:16 -0000

Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> wrote:
    >>> I also don't think that it's necessary, once a protocol is successful;
    >>> after broad deployment, people don't need to go searching for
    >>> implementations. It *is* useful when a project is starting, to help early
    >>> implementers find each other, though. 
    >>
    >> Yes, agreed!  The idea would be light the fire of widespread implementation
    >> by the kindling (code) that tracked the I-D as it became an RFC.  

    > It might be useful (for you all and for the IAB program) to look at the
    > codestand (originally codematch) project, both its successes and its
    > failures. The email lists are still in the archives. I followed it at the
    > beginning, but don't know much about it other than it was in part trying to
    > help match up implementors with standards.

It was more a mentee/mentor matching around the code/standard situation.
I get the impression that the effort just ran out of oomph.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-