From: <RANDY@MPA15AB.MV.UNISYS.COM>
Date: 22 JAN 96 14:32   
To: <drums%cs.utk.edu@MVDNS1.MV-oc.Unisys.COM>,
        <moore%cs.utk.edu@MVDNS1.MV-oc.Unisys.COM>,
        <ERIC%LSOFT.COM@MVDNS1.MV-oc.Unisys.COM>
Subject: Re: The conservative and liberal commandment
In-Reply-To: Your message of "21 Jan 1996 11:43:25 EST"
Message-Id: <EBYQ3026C7D71D@MPA15AB>

On 21 Jan 1996 11:43:25 EST, Eric Thomas <ERIC@LSOFT.COM> wrote:

> ... The  real problem with Internet standards  is that
> there is no  certification process....
>
> You'll find many counter-examples in the real world - protocols that
> say "To do X you must send Y, period" and where people write code that
> does Y, period, and have it certified by an organization that makes
> sure they do Y, period.  These products interoperate much, much better
> than Internet software does.  And the specs are unambiguous, so any
> two engineers can quickly agree whether the standards says you should
> do Y or Y'.

I tend to agree, and wish there was a certification authority.  But I
have experienced significant ambiguity in other protocols.  I recall
being in a meeting where engineers were arguing over just what the
real meaning was to "non-significant line breaks" in OSI FTAM.  It's
been a few years, but as I recall, since all the "significant" options
for line breaks were optional, everyone wanted to cram their own
meaning onto "non-significant" line breaks.