From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-x22e.google.com (mail-ig0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA82A200BD0 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 00:38:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ig0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hl1so4130882igb.1 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 00:37:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=lEYDPG3aP8DnGji8Yih8QGnX+RFHHi+8Cz2U+3/ZcAo=; b=dsVq12aol7lHgPhZHJPtj198qoS3Y4gfvd/jkfcdkDH7OHG5qwbmKb0jl/FMTsOSna TXPyppfjxFo7R/+Vd4qbc2qD+dpRy5qMzar7NsB5j9rklLoVSVgc69C4+avG6NwVmiKs uoH4BO3vo4REyPcZAsVsRWl8COl5z/h75iBALyv1UJ4R4H6W1qm4XIZgae+S90gEBmRw 2+l4rRZ+Q9RHavhisK+eKCZxj4HI56vN5uXCRVFQouVm2KN8NH2sGd4Q8INe3mXLXlvz i1Jk497KTwnqG+oQBeha+Ua+up5qHAtJO4J/hf2p5KPxLSlY2E8ICJh5efqdg2TTjoOT qnUA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.51.17.11 with SMTP id ga11mr23737308igd.36.1389688679563; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 00:37:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.50.146 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 00:37:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 03:37:59 -0500 Message-ID: From: Christopher Robin To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] notes on going for a stable release X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 08:38:44 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 08:38:44 -0000 Thanks for these notes. As a user who's been frustrated in trying to understand the state of CeroWrt and find a way to contribute, I find this very helpful. I'm not sure what to make of the following though. On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > ** What is CeroWrt? > > Originally intended to prove out a bunch of AQM and scheduling ideas, > it's done that. We proved dnssec was feasible, and simon kelly is > doing that. ISC and openwrt got signed updates working recently, the > only major update-in-the-field problem for openwrt is on updating > kernels. > > CeroWrt is ALSO useful for day-to-day use, presently. If CeroWrt has fulfilled it's original intentions, where does that leave us now? What improvements is CeroWrt currently working on that OpenWrt lacks? What's the end game? I haven't been here long, but it seems to me that CeroWrt should avoid being a distribution and instead stick to being a proof-of-concept project. "Going stable" shouldn't mean having a release with bug fixes that's ready for a production environment, it should mean having the code tested to a point where it can be pushed upstream to OpenWrt to implement into their releases. It should be about setting a new "close enough" baseline to get testers/users to help stress test the new code. But I'm new here, and I don't fully understand the workflows and ideologies involved. Maybe having a stable release is required to push CeroWrt improvements upstream. Or maybe that's not what you guys are aiming for. Some questions that may help provide a better scope for the project: How many users have CeroWrt running in a production environment (as the primary router in a business)? How many users have CeroWrt running as a primary or only router at home? Is it a goal of this group to provide a CeroWrt build for businesses to run as their /only/ edge router on and expect 24/7 uptime? Is it a goal of this group to provide a CeroWrt build easy enough for the average end user (grandma) to run on their only router? .... Hrm, I'm rereading all the above and having difficulty liking it for some reason so let me sum up. ***Are we here for research and development, or are we here for final implementation? If we're here for R&D then our "stable" build should be what most distributions would consider as a beta. Something like we're 99% certain it won't brick your router and 80-95% certain it won't be unusable. If we're trying to be a distribution for end users, we should really look at expanding the number of routers we support.