ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] 0. General -- the state of play

2003-12-01 14:15:34
"Eric S. Raymond" <esr(_at_)thyrsus(_dot_)com> wrote:
4. LMAP seems neglected recently.  This is bad.

  I've been busy, and the authors of the various related drafts have
resisted combining their proposals.  I hope to have more LMAP updates
in the future.

  We're being distracted by stuff that (I think) is less important
than putting an IETF stamp on *some* LMAP design.  I have my own
preferences but I'm not going to push them here.  The point is we
need to have a road forward.

  <shrug> There is significant opposition to doing *anything*; with
the excuse that the proposal (whatever it is) is not perfect, or will
cost too much to deploy, or that it hasn't been demonstrated to be
useful, etc.

  There is so much opposition to LMAP related solutions that I'm
skeptical if it (or any proposal) will ever be approved by anyone.
I'm still involved in ASRG, because I have the naive belief that we
can do *something* about the problem, other than sticking our
collective heads in the sand.

  Alan DeKok.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg