ECN-Sane’s rules of operation

This project intends to thoroughly evaluate the effects of ECN across the edge of the Internet.

We expect much work to take place on the mailing list. Like all bufferbloat.net lists, ecn-sane is an open mailing list, however, given the level of religious advocacy of ECN elsewhere on the Internet, it has several policies that are new to bufferbloat.net.

People will be banned, after 3 warnings, from the email list, for the following reasons:

• Unwillingness or inability to repeat experiments against modern versions of cubic, bbr and reno.
• Non-publication of sufficient code required for others to repeat your experiments.
• Unbridled advocacy OR outright hatred of ECN.

Additionally:

• Project members should identify themselves as part of the grey, yellow, pink, red, blue, purple or green teams, but it’s not required.

With a scientific approach there is no need to argue over anything with stress, or to give others coronaries, as it were. There is no shame in being “wrong”, nor everlasting glory in being “right”, about anything, if one yields to well-gathered evidence. There’s just the scientific process. The bulldozer of science.

We suggest this - and a good sense of humor! - as a part of any policy to avoid logical fallacies, and to at least admit or recognize them when we do.

We don’t see too many logical fallacies from this crowd. What we see more often is that we sometimes lack the data to draw certain conclusions, because we don’t always have the time and resources to collect it. So we use our intuition when we have to (and there are some pretty darn good ones in this group), but we do have to be careful about what final conclusions we draw. Assertions and hypotheses for sake of discussion starters should be fine, and we shouldn’t be afraid to be wrong with those, lest we freeze before saying or trying anything. We will try to avoid Argumentum ad baculum, Proof by intimidation, Thought terminating cliche’s, Single cause fallacies, Regression fallacies, Proof by repeated Assertion, and Argument from authority

Prior to now, the 21 one year long bikeshed around ECN has been around - those that favor it, those that favor it with modifications, those that are scared of it, and the vast majority are those that haven’t heard of it and/or don’t care.

TEAMS

GREY - Don’t care about ECN one way or another

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen’s position, at least until he finishes his thesis.

RED - Opposed to wide deployment of ECN

At the moment there is no-one on the red team.

PINK - ECN’s definition needs to be totally changed to deploy

This group is well populated currently outside this project. Members of that group are welcome here so long as they play by the rules.

YELLOW - Chicken about wide deployment of ECN

The PI for this is Dave Taht, as explained in his position paper.

SEERSUCKER - With a particular reservation

“I think ECN needs to be demonstrated to be needed and useful, especially given BBR.”

– Vint Cerf

PURPLE - How does ECN need to evolve to reach its potential?

The color might change. This classification can be changed. Jonathon Morton’s position and Pete Heist’s position fall in this category, as does Loganaden Velvindron.

BLUE - we are GO for ECN on EVERYTHING!

This group is well populated currently outside this project. In addition Jake Holland is blue with yellow stripes.

GREEN - ECN is safe for universal deployment

At the moment there should be nobody on the green team.

Obligatory FutureRama Snippet