-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com]
It is akin to standardizing on what kind of light can come in your
neighbourhood.
properly done, and with no adjectives or judgement spin, it could be
a
taxonomy of what kinds of light are known. this might be
useful, witness
a recent discussion re wap of what is being on the internet.
Hi Randy,
Yes - both AOL and WAP aren't IP solutions in true sense, but both are
unqualified commercial success for the organizations promoting them.
Yes, you can go ahead and blame AOL and WAP forum for them but who
would you blame for creating NAT. NAT is no less offender of the end
to end design paradigm, than WAP and AOL. Why criticize WAP forum if
it decided not to hide wireless devices behind NAT boxes.
After hearing Java and Windows on every device, I am hearing NAT and
BGP for every thing from some vendors. Who is controlling these
standards - is it IETF. Or it is OK to do any thing as long as your
implementation gets published as an I-D or RFC (in that case AOL and
WAP forums should perhaps publish their specs as RFCs). Hear..hear..
Cheers,
--brijesh
(personal views only)