  Unwritten languages today often have no official grammar, and are rather
governed by "unspoken rules". Similarly, we argue that the young discipline of
networking is still a practice that lacks a deep understanding of the rules
that govern it. This situation results in a tremendous loss of time and
efforts. First, since the rules are unspoken, they are not systematically
reused. Second, since there is no grammar, it is impossible to assert if a
sentence is correct. Comparing two networking approaches or solutions is
sometimes a synonym of endless religious debates. Drawing the proper conclusion
from this claim, we advocate that networking research should spend more efforts
on better understanding its rules as a first step to automatically reuse them.
To illustrate our claim, we focus in this paper on one specific networking
problem, and show how different instances of this same problem were solved in
parallel, resulting in different solutions, and no explicit knowledge reuse.
