At 02:36 PM 1/15/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>Richard J. Sexton a �crit:
>>
>> At 11:11 AM 1/15/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>>
>> >1) The A.A.A. has already assisted online voting successfully for a number
>> >of organizations, including a large, dispersed trade union.
>>
>> "We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and
>running code.
>> - "IETF Credo. David Clark (MIT)
>
>Rough consensus = stiffling dissent.
!?!?!?!?!? You're joking, right?
>And what's running code got to do with it? This is just some IETF
hocus-pocus.
>What's the point of quoting from a
>bunch that's working furiously to write a contract for protocol publication
>with the IANA? Those people haven't got a clue, to borrow one of their own
>expressions.
I think you just told us your level of cluefulness. I hate to sound
patronizing here, but this statement deserves it, in full. Running code is
the code running on the servers without which the Internet doesn't run, at
all. The guys that write it are the ones actually in control. If they don't
agree with something they will not implement it. More accurately, if it is
only a political restriction, it will often be ignored. Developers tend to
want to make the *whole* machine work, not just a sub-set. If they can make
something happen, they will. BIND, sendmail, postfix, GateD are all good
examples of running code. If you want to change their functionality then
feel free to re-write/enhance the running code, submit the changes, and
talk folks into using it. This is completely independednt of any efforts in
any of these forums. This is also completely disassociated from the IETF.
IMHO, the IETF documents standards *after* the code is running. Often the
code is implemented and tested first, especially in the open-source world.
It's not like the developers get major bux for their efforts either. It
doesn't become a reference standard until there is an open-source example.
Another example of running code is any Linux distro. Although it uses a lot
of IETF standards, it is not subject to IETF review, thank god.
Maybe you think it is an accident that many in these forums are also
programmer/analysts?
Maybe you should check out a class in Information Technology 101?
>> "We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more
>> humane and fair than the world your governments have made before." -
Barlow.
>
>Well, it isn't, since it's made by the same creatures who made everything
>else - human beings - with all our weaknesses and fallacies. The refusal of
>the IETF to recognize reality is thrusting them into the dustbin.
Your refusal to understand reality is, thankfully, limited in its
effectiveness by your inability/unwillingness to contribute to the
running-code effort. Idiots like you will always be filtered through a
programmer/analyst that you have to get to do the work for you. This is the
main reason the Internet works. Go ahead, feel powerless, that is because
you are.
___________________________________________________
Roeland M.J. Meyer -
e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
___________________________________________________
KISS ... gotta love it!
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
