On Aug 11, 2005, at 2:22, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I think that's right. However, what may well be missing in the mix
is input from people who actually deploy and operate our stuff, and
live with its limitations and quirks every day. We need to understand
the indirect consequences of our choices: not "can it be coded and will
it interoperate?" but "will it drive service providers and users
crazy?"
Brian
thats -one- reason that DNSSEC has gestated these long months/years.
operational feedback killed the first three attempts and may cripple
the
current version beyond repair. Either we eat our own dog-food
(presuming
that the folks who design these things actual have networks entrusted
to
them to run this goop on (and no, an NS simulation does _NOT_ count),
OR
we have to find willing/gullible folks w/ the resources and interest
in shaking
down the crap that we pass off as implementation specs or $DIETY
forbid,
prototype code.
brief summary - we should be the "service providers" and "users"
of the stuff we design/build... if it drives you crazy or eats all your
remained time, then perhaps others less intimate w/ the ideas will
be less than enthusiastic to embrace our ideas.
--bill
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf