[standards-jig] JEPs and Jabber Adoption

Joe Hildebrand JHildebrand at jabber.com
Tue Jul 1 01:40:58 UTC 2003


Tijl said:
> Sometimes Jabber is compared to TCP/IP. What TCP/IP is to 
> networks, Jabber could be for exchanging XML data. Imagine 
> that for building a standerdized protocol on top of TCP/IP 
> you had to go through the JEP process! 

Whoa.  Getting something to RFC in the IETF is even more difficult than the
JEP process.

> In the case of TCP/IP 
> there are a *lot* of open standards, and many try to do the 
> same things. Yet, through the proces of implementation and 
> usage, we practically all use the same standards for the same 
> things. There is no interop. hell as far as I know! 

Thanks to the IESG.  In the face of claims (like this) of obstructionism,
they still manage to push IETF working groups to produce quality product.
And they catch crazy stuff before it gets out into the wild (like SIMPLE
over UDP with no congestion control).

I understand people want things to move faster.  I'm sorry I'm a stick in
the mud.  I'm not going to vote +1 on something just because everybody
thinks it's cool and wants to start implementing.

But then, I'm in the camp that thinks anyone can write code that wants to,
and can implement any JEP in any stage of the process.  You just have to be
prepared to change it when it goes to the next status, and deal with the
interop and upgrade issues.  Which may not be that big a deal.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand
 



More information about the Standards mailing list