🚀 go-pugleaf

From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )

In article <270@longway.TIC.COM> Shane P. McCarron <ahby@bungia.bungia.mn.org> writes:
>In defense of the NIST, I know that they are not trying to
>destroy the standards making process.  In reality they are
>just a bunch of people trying to do their jobs the best way
>they know how.  It is unfortunate that in doing so they may
>end up doing more harm than good.

I fully agree with your criticism of the way NIST has taken it upon
themselves to publish FIPS before the related standards in progress
are even semi-stable.  As a member of an agency that has to justify
not specifying compliance with applicable FIPS, I must say that far
from helping me procure standard-environment systems, NIST is making
it difficult to procure ANY system, let alone one that sufficiently
meets our needs.  FIPS-151 is a minor disaster that fortunately can
probably be straightened out before it is too late, but additional
FIPS for other 1003.* areas are definitely premature and interfere
with production of quality standardized environmental specifications.

If NIST had Ken Thompson, Dennis Ritchie, Brian Kernighan, and Rob
Pike (for example) writing their FIPS, then it wouldn't distress me
so much, because at least the FIPS would be reasonable specifications.
But they are FAR from being in a position to develop clean, usable
operating system environment specifications on their own.  Why are
they trying to do so?  It's completely subverting the standardization
process!

[ FIPS-151 is the one published in August 1988 about IEEE 1003.1.  -mod ]

Volume-Number: Volume 15, Number 39