Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] implementation must *lead* standardization

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:40:24 -0400

SIP :)

THough far less of a 'committee' design when it was first done - really 
from a small group of largely academics. But still, it was published as 
an RFC long before widespread adoption that it has now.

-Jonathan R.

David Barrett wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:[email-masked]]
>> Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] implementation must *lead* standardization
>>
>> (*) There are other examples that would tell us to start implementation
>> after you finished standardization. Again others tell us to work on
>> protoypes during the standardization phase. Finally, there are many
>> examples that tell us that prototypes are not enough to get widespread
>> deployment.
>>
>> In essence, you pick your favorite example and use it as a justification
>> why to go for one approach and not for another one.
> 
> Which examples did you have in mind of extremely successful internet
> technologies that were invented on paper by a committee before any
> individual implementation gained widespread adoption?
> 
> -david
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> P2PSIP mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
> 

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow                                   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[email-masked]                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

---

From: "David Barrett" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:54:39 -0700

Pick any protocol that comes pre-installed on your computer, anything you
rely upon a hundred times a day -- HTTP, SSH, DNS, FTP, IRC, POP, SMTP,
whatever -- and read up on its origins.  More often than not, you'll find a
lone, disgruntled programmer at its core.

The internet wasn't designed by committee.  It was built by a series of
remarkable individuals.  Nobody's under any obligation to follow their
example.  But I suspect the most successful among us will.

Indeed, if we look around at the great protocols today, they already are.

-david

> From: Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 1:40 PM
> To: David Barrett
> Cc: 'Hannes Tschofenig'; 'Henry Sinnreich'; 'P2PSIP Mailing List'

---

From: "Henry Sinnreich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:27:00 -0700

Actually, the IETF meetings were multicast with audio/video, white board
and some text (not IM) starting around 1992-1993 and SIP was proposed to
an IETF meeting in 1996.

If anyone has exact dates available, please fee free to correct me,
since SIP is an excellent illustration how real time interactive
multimedia on the Internet was implemented in academia and in the IETF
several years before the emergence of the standard.

SIP is thus an excellent illustration to David Barrett's point.

The fact that the telephone industry has adopted SIP is IMHO only a
byproduct, due to the fact of being the real world based Internet
multimedia protocol.

Henry 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 10:40 PM
To: David Barrett
Cc: 'Hannes Tschofenig'; Henry Sinnreich; 'P2PSIP Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] implementation must *lead* standardization

SIP :)

-Jonathan R.