Re: [cti-stix] Re: [cti-taxii] Learning the lessons of the Past (CORBA. Yes, CORBA)

[Trey Darley <trey@soltra.com>]

I *wish* there was a mechanism to allow us to programatically derive the actual specs (be they XSD, UML, RDF, OWL, JSON, etc) from a running reference implementation.

/me dreams of cyber-unicorns jumping over rainbows...

Cheers,
Trey
--
Trey Darley
Senior Security Engineer
Soltra | An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company
www.soltra.com

________________________________________
From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Dr. Eric Burger <eric.burger@georgetown.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 20:29
To: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [cti-stix] Re: [cti-taxii] Learning the lessons of the Past (CORBA. Yes, CORBA)

Yes, yes, yes, yes!!!!

The IETF lost its way -- the catchphrase used to be ?rough consensus and running code.? Somewhere along the way we lost the running code part. Lots of ?standards? where we got rough consensus but when people tried to implement them, no one could produce running code.

We are doing well with Soltra, OpenTAXII, Cabby, et al. Let?s keep it up.

On Jul 27, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Jordan, Bret <bret.jordan@BLUECOAT.COM> wrote:

I completely agree with this...  Lets avoid these mistakes and others that have come up over time.   Another good read is this diatribe about AMQP...  This is not an endorsement from me or a complaint from me about AMQP, but rather a good illustration of how things can go wrong in a standards body and get off in to the weeds... Lets avoid the things he calls out as well.

http://www.imatix.com/articles:whats-wrong-with-amqp/



Thanks,

Bret