W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > November 2001

Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery

From: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:01:08 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <200111281901.fASJ18D464687@pachyderm.pa.dec.com>
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
Cc: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>, "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>, Discuss Apps <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>

I think this states the situation very succinctly, though I would also 
say that making incremental changes to HTTP has gotten very hard, given 
its design.  Trivial things are still (often) simple in HTTP, but some 
slightly less simple things have now become almost impossible.

I think in fact such an effort will have to be done by a small team
(mostly) outside the IETF to build such a framework, but don't know
of anyone working on it right now.  The issue is to make sure
the IETF is "institutionally friendly" enough that such a team
can get the help it needs in the areas where the IETF is very strong.
			- Jim

> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= <paf@cisco.com>
> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:52:53 +0100
> To: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>,
>         "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
> Cc: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>, Discuss Apps <discuss@apps.ietf.org>,
>         Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
> Subject: Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery
> -----
> --On 01-11-28 10.31 -0800 Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com> wrote:
> 
> > So, by inaction, the IETF is likely condemned to the kludge tower growing
> > ever higher....  Someday it will fall over.  Or maybe it is job security
> > for us all??? :-)
> 
> There is another problem we have in the IETF, or two:
> 
>  - It is very hard to start from scratch with anything today. One have to
>    come to the IETF with something which is so baked that it is almost
>    ready to eat. Look at the IDN discussions where we are today.
>    Completely useless discussions, to be honest. A correct design
>    should have been made before the discussion started.
> 
>  - Coming up with something which is completely new is hard. Many people
>    have to implement it, write code, etc etc. Incremental changes are
>    easier. Much easier. This is why I feel so many people get "ok" from
>    their companies to spend time using HTTP or whatever else which exists.
>    "It exists" and they don't have to write things from the beginning
>    again.
> 
> I might be an optimistic person (I have to I guess :-) but I hope that
> people designing new things still see a value using IETF for review of new
> things.

I hope so to...

> 
> Generally, I do agree in your view that IETF doesn't understand needs from
> Applications. And I don't know what to do about it.
> 
> I am listening.
> 
>    paf

--
Jim Gettys
Cambridge Research Laboratory
Compaq Computer Corporation
jg@pa.dec.com
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2001 14:01:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:11:29 GMT