i will not dispute this, not my point. but i have to respect dino and the lisp fanboys (and, yes, they are all boys) for actually *doing* something after 30 years of loc/id blah blah blah (as did hip). putting their, well dino's, code where their mouths were and going way out on a limb.
[ i have been correctly reminded that dino is far from the only lisp hacker these days, e.g. http://www.openlisp.org/ being notable. ]
Understood. But watch for similarities between 6to4 and LISP. Both are clever, both have great intentions, both are extremely dangerous once people start thinking this is anything beyond a toy.
again, i will not dispute this. it is not my point.
And when lowly plebeians like myself hear that research folks at iij and Facebook are doing "something" with LISP, we think that is a blessing of this technology.
when you hear that research folk are doing something, the best guess would be that it's research. :)
But, after the "fan boy" chatter dies down, you hear that this is not actually support, it's just engineers doing "Dino" a favor.
not exactly. someone i respect is doing some r&d. we do r&d. we all help each other. vendors are kind enough to loan kit to researchers. this does not mean they endorse all of our r&ds projects, just that they endorse and help r&d. our job is to make the internet a better place. on the ops side, when things break, isps all help each other, loan line cards, do remote hands, etc., whether our marketing departments compete or not. our job is to keep the internet running well.
I fear that at its worst and most successful, LISP ensures ipv4 is the backbone transport media to the detriment of ipv6 and at its best, it is a distraction for folks that need to be making ipv6 work, for real.
i suspect that a number of lisp proponents are of that mind. i do not think it does a service to the internet.
PS. I think the research guys should give more time to ILNP
looks interesting but i am unaware of a public code base or research testbed. whack me with a clue bat. randy