ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: clarification on consensus call for compromise

2004-09-10 06:47:12

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Danny Angus wrote:
Andrew Newton wrote:
>
> No single scope would be mandatory to provide or check;

I think that one unencumbered scope should be mandatory.

I concur. Trying to slide PRA around the non-consensus wall by making it one of several optional scopes is not a good answer. There needs to be at least one unencumbered mandatory scope so that deployment does not degenerate into non-interoperable closed source 'PRA supporters' and F/OSS based 'SPF supporters' camps. Which is precisely what will happen if passed along in this form.

--
Benjamin Franz