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

Vijay Gurbani <> Thu, 20 August 2020 21:16 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB3A3A1425 for <>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u2HqLiCai_QV for <>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::630]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ECE63A1424 for <>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id kq25so4195633ejb.3 for <>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qz5FRnpuu/nGqYNULIZV4pRpfuS1uhuTeqd2WfPty6M=; b=E3K+r/ScSmHRS5G73f3m7nF+5JXu7mjdbMu9B72owql2gcb2Qc3Q3Q/FLcGgFgrq6F 9NTUiA/pZkphr2wwOSe/qazDbd+6TRqLQ8sLDiTU0PeBtGtP2MWNoEt+3abBpi+oQMwZ Qg6dK0sGVaj8pvkLxxds2bIbT/+8+Zqkr5iGAou0vE5IgQNCPgLgSnKjwuaSIKDG9yD1 ysKRyKChninysYALwB0knnm+Cm6ILPPn/H8BXpe/xpA42pUGUFU/frnfd/lKjEpZHc3a leG4ZCrxTSn0pcOADXvw+md+rScCD6oOH1yBWoxGQu2EdgrlYDANm3RCEyiSao73fYAo I+dA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qz5FRnpuu/nGqYNULIZV4pRpfuS1uhuTeqd2WfPty6M=; b=V4BiA6EKsMSqkE4GmxgaKstNeOhC5VksqLtrQqjBuwaqMeSZbqUrALdezT5i+8oqAl l0lScO2jl+HPlYwYrVOmRfsIsmBxYjG/ErY0ctMhOqyQyuK9Kmgvzd68iryAxg54qBnX 2WD6nCGtJzpUuxqL1iARQbDnvthKG0+ZXuVl0JzxHybyjnQUKUGvSeODmJEVNyXynty0 HCsylfKN6BFVHm0L2PVGZjqoSosa9hpKa8jjxxRtfkiK/l75asxPLKHmwcuDOQce5QJQ tQ6T8ViakrVrx7+g/gaX6/erlzlgwq7s4XtOMA606vsoP0fd878EBNh5e3QPrJhQg2b9 vg/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5316C8ulf0Fg1JgNt1jIbTql2tCHyKUOSprjs3KEqPNwcu7k5/gf m/CeKkI8gTFdp5VwXEZwS1bkOJ7HfmZ78BZFC04=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyS05hLGZdDy014MiRI8TeDLU5LdCyFstw24pIE84KUJ3Qdu26LKRRbhmEIvDJ/NRpu8T01vDHzVbeyqNaqUzU=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:9385:: with SMTP id l5mr597905ejx.144.1597958200570; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Vijay Gurbani <>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:15:11 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: An IETF repository for working code in our protocols?
To: Melinda Shore <>
Cc: IETF WG Chairs <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e93f6f05ad55a2df"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:16:44 -0000

Dear Melinda: Thank you again for your time.  Please see inline.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 3:42 PM Melinda Shore <>

> On 8/20/20 12:28 PM, Vijay Gurbani wrote:
> > So the problem is simple: When we have high quality implementations for
> certain protocols that we standardize, can we come up with a place to park
> these implementations so they can be used by implementers to get a head
> start?
> TBH you lost me at "high quality."

:-) We can have a gradient measure instead of an absolute measure, sure, no
problem.  "Sufficiently reasonable quality starter code", then :-)

Anyway, I'm still unclear on why this would be a sufficient improvement
> over existing mechanisms (basically, open source + decent search engines +
> WG wiki pages with links to implementations and other resources) to justify
> the effort and possible legal
> complications.

Imagine if we told implementers that we know this RFC has an errata, but
with due diligence, please find them yourself.

To my earlier point again, WG pages, WG Wiki pages, datatrackers, all make
sense to you and me.  Not to many people who will like to implement our
protocols without burying themselves deep into IETF lore [1].  When I talk
to developers at companies and students at universities, if they have heard
of IETF at all, it is mostly through knowing that some organization called
IETF produces these RFCs.  That's it.  Perhaps for them that is enough.
And if you buy that argument, then the corollary is that we should do
everything in our power to make sure that they have all of the information
they need to implement the protocol from the RFC itself.

[1] They should, but that is another discussion.  I certainly have
benefited tremendously from my association with the IETF.


- vijay