On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 14:40:41 +0100, Randy Bush said:
This needs to be given some attention in the IETF...\Stef
ok. i give. why?
there are only a few thousand of us, far too few to fix microsoft's
bugs. and we don't have the source anyway.
We can't fix their bugs.
I think the reason Einar forwarded it was for this:
The problem is that due to the Market share of Microsoft an error in a
Microsoft program may force non-Microsoft users to make changes, and
possibly also imply a loss of mail functionality.
There *is* the 800-pound gorilla problem here. If one company with
significant market share manages to Do It Very Wrongly, it leaves everybody
else having to decide between being able to follow the standard, or being
able to intercommunicate.
There's been a lot of discussion on the NANOG mailing list regarding a
certain router vendor with high market share, whos gear will forward a
bad BGP route and *then* reset the session, rather than the other way
around - this is generally acknowledged to be against the spec, and has
caused a lot of operational problems. Interestingly enough, most of
the problems are seen on *other* people's gear - the offending vendor's
stuff manages to survive the ensuing badness.
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
pgpjT93Rb8H6n.pgp
Description: PGP signature