[ih] Tell me about host names and 3com

[Dave Crocker]

n 1/17/2024 4:53 PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history wrote:
> On 18-Jan-24 12:02, John Gilmore via Internet-history wrote:
>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> 
>> wrote:
>>> If I am an entrepreneur musing about writing a new mail system, both
>>> clients and server, totally from scratch with no use of existing
>>> libraries or such, is there any place where I can find the complete
>>> set of specifications for what my new software has to do in order to
>>> interoperate with the rest of Internet email?
>>
>> In short, no.
>
> It turns out to be a hard problem, which the IETF has been aware of
> at some level for a couple of decades, but has never solved. 


Some years ago, I started a project to satisfy exactly the kind of need 
you expressed. I could not get any traction for it.  Here is the 
prototype that was produced:

    Technology Document Suites <#>

    🔗 https://bbiw.net/clusters/ <https://bbiw.net/clusters/>


The combination of this and my earlier Success/Failure documentation 
effort (*) suggests that the fun of producing documents is not matched 
with a general, follow-on concern about actual utility.

Obviously individuals and groups, here and there, do care about 
utility.  But the IETF, as a body, leaves such issues to others, except 
marginally when full standardization is sought.

There is no community interest in tracking and assessing overall IETF 
effectiveness.

d/


> -------- Forwarded Message -------- 

> Subject: 	Re: [ih] IETF relevance (was Memories of Flag Day?)
> Date: 	Thu, 10 Aug 2023 15:55:28 -0700
> From: 	Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net>
>
> To: 	internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>
>
> On 8/10/2023 9:35 AM, Scott Bradner via Internet-history wrote:
>> mixed picture of IETF relevance
>
> In 2009, I explored creating a wiki for assessing IETF successes and 
> failures.  With help from a couple of others I compiled data on a 
> number of efforts, in order to give the pseudo-wiki flesh. It was 
> intended for community maintenance and enhancement.
>
> When I queried about interest in it, ISOC got all excited and made a 
> big splash about it, and published it at isoc.org.
>
> No one ever attempted to add anything to it.  And it's gone from ISOC.\

Here is a rendering of a page from that:

    ietf-sucfail-01dc.html <#>

    🔗
    https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5pt3e1g96aaledt7judff/ietf-sucfail-01dc.html?rlkey=tcr9byd2b86vijhk6l49r5k3c&dl=0
    <https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5pt3e1g96aaledt7judff/ietf-sucfail-01dc.html?rlkey=tcr9byd2b86vijhk6l49r5k3c&dl=0>


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
mast:@dcrocker at mastodon.social