e...@thyrsus.com said: > Don't you think it makes sense to very our client code against a known-good > implementation first, though?
Maybe. Maybe not. If we had a known-good server and somebody who was sitting next to me knew all about it and was prepared to help debug, sure that would be a good way to go. But I don't agree with your "first". I think we know enough about what we need to do that the risk of wasting a lot of effort because we got a bogus program structure is low so I don't see the need to do that testing early. Devil's advocate hat on. We should debug as much as possible independently and then see if they inter-operate. If not, we should figure out why. If the people reading the specs got different answers, there is probably a section that needs tweaking to avoid an ambiguity. Here is an alternative sequence... Write hack program to call NTS-KE-server, send request, get answer, decode and print answer. Debug that program on existing remote server. Use it to debug our server. ... That program would probably be handy for debugging so maybe we should write it anyway. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
