[ppml] Metric for rejecting policy proposals: AC candidate question
At 9:33 -0400 10/4/06, Sandy Murphy wrote:
>Ed Lewis said:
>>Part of my gut reaction is that English is not C - English is not as
>But your email suggested that strict adherence to terminology is a good
>thing. So I'm strictly adhering.
The processes surrounding the Internet are evolving. As the Internet
has moved from being an experiment to a utility the focus has
changed. Words written (say) 10 years ago assumed more context than
is needed now. 10 years ago, there was a lot more homogeneity in the
community, we "spoke the same language." And that language was C.)
Nowadays, the chance that the latest member speaks the same language
is lower (not just Python, but business, legal, etc.).
This is why I emphasized Scott Bradner's point of two years ago ("no
IPs, Internet Addresses!") as important to us now. Those of us who
have been around a long time need to be mindful that we need to step
up our use of formal terms so as to not confuse the newcomers.
This isn't unique to ARIN. I see it in where I've done more work -
the IETF. The original specifications for DNS (RFC 1034, 1035) were
good enough then to start the system but today wouldn't be good
enough for a draft. More recent RFCs on DNS have increasingly formal
It's all part of the evolution of the Internet. It's an evolution
that isn't taught in engineering school.
The lack of formality in the past has opened the system up for abuse.
Abuse is never good. We can either accept it or defend against it by
modifying the words and processes. That is what happens in the real
world, it needs to happen here. But is needs to happen appropriately.
Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
Secrets of Success #107: Why arrive at 7am for the good parking space?
Come in at 11am while the early birds drive out to lunch.