[e2e] Are we doing sliding window in the Internet?

[Detlef Bosau]

Lynne Jolitz wrote:
> Jim,
> Perfectly correct. The Linux model is very different from the older BSD model of major changes and revisions every few years, and it follows more the product "renovation" cycle that Ray Lane of KPCB espouses. Bridging the gap by carefully following incremental work is the price to be paid by academics to ensure the continuity of their work in Linux.
>
> Many people on the academic side still use forms of BSD, and perhaps prefer the old way of doing things. I use BSD myself. However, Linux is clearly the market leader and cooperating with how they handle their development model is a key consideration for promulgating new work in networking and operating systems.
>   

That´s simply not the point.

I think, Lloyd Wood made the point precisely:

"Academics are rewarded by writing papers. They are not rewarded by staying current with the current codebase of the linux kernel/ns."

And this holds for BSD, the OMNET simulator and for all other software that exists.

This is no bad excuse for academics not doint Linux development. It´s 
simply the fact, that research is focussed an detecting and solving 
problems. This is totally different from development and marketing. It´s 
the difference between  proving algebraic rules for dealing with natural 
numbers and developing and sell a new desktop calculator.

Research is fundamental by its nature and thus has to be independend 
from simulators and operating systems. There are many fields of research 
where implementations even do not yet exists - nevertheless they are 
necessary.

I think the basic dispute here is simply a misconception of the very 
difference between research and development.

Detlef