Keith Moore wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 16:18:40 -0400
"Burger, Eric" <eburger(_at_)cantata(_dot_)com> wrote:
I would offer that in *some* groups the running code bar is reasonable.
I would have little objection to requiring running code as a test of
feasibility of a new idea. I would object strongly to an argument that just
because someone has running code, means it's a good indication of adequacy of
the protocol...DKIM is a great example of a poorly designed protocol that has
been justified by running code.
This is simply untrue. The fact that we had running code across multiple
disparate code bases was offered only as an indication as to the maturity
of the draft. We never said that was the only reason or even the primary
reason that the working group should be formed and that it progress to
PS. None of the participants that I've come across think that running
code trumps rough consensus -- both of which has been chugging alone
nicely, I'll add.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf