> The only paper i know of that sort of mentions stackable dst (this years > after they existed) was in OLS 2-3 years back where they are mentioned > in conjunction with
"Linux IPv6 Networking, [...]": http://archive.linuxsymposium.org/ols2003/Proceedings/All-Reprints/Reprint-Yoshifuji-OLS2003.pdf I came across it this this morning, after David's message, indeed. That's where I got the idea that he meant XFRM from. > Your mistake was to put a plug for your work which you deemed > (implicitly perhaps as) revolutionary ;-> point taken: plugging was out-of-place. And even more dumb in a Linux specific forum. For the record: I obviously don't see my work as some revolutionary cure-all solution. > Thats too simplistic an explanation which implies that academia gets it > right. There's also a lot of vaporware and fundware[2] in academia. I certainly don't believe that they always get it right. But that when you weed through the cruft, the right stuff should be in there as well. David objects that this is not true in the real world. Perhaps correctly in certain cases. No point debating that in general terms. Even if so, I believe continuing development ("standing on the shoulders of giants") is best achieved by explaining why you've done what you've done, not just by doing it. This holds double for stuff that bombed. Unfortunately, writing is time-consuming and to no direct advantage if not in your job description. > > Mine isn't. > > If VJ is a realist then you are not i suppose - i think thats where the > conflict is for you with everyone else who has responded to you so far. I only meant here that my goal wasn't to solve that particular problem. I personally do try to work on practical issues. But at the same time you're right, ofcourse, that there's a clash between practical development and an academic researcher's goals. As a PhD student my official goal is to come up with one independent and novel idea. That's what I get judged on, and that's what I like. Whether or not it is directly applicable is beside the point; my personal preference is also not important in this: i.e., being a realist is not part of my job description. Many ideas took a long time to become of use. Take the recent renewed interest in hypervisors. Did that make them less worthwhile to pursue originally? Not to some, at least. Before I have to defend this as 'a good thing': everyone is entitled to his own opinion of the comparative merits of (applied) science, idem for development. > You are not gonna get an applause around here. Try to be like the old-VJ > (maybe the new one is still the same as the old) and noone will spank > you ;-> I'll remember that. I will... or I'll look elsewhere for fellow airheads to discuss useless academic trivia with ;) Either case I'll leave you to your work. Shall we leave it at this? Willem - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
