Hi Stuart,
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to be insulting...
We don't typically include statements about how we compete or don't
compete with any non-IETF protocols, including de-facto standards
and/or standards from other standards groups, as that is more of a
marketing discussion than a technical discussion.
If there is a technical concern regarding interoperability or
compatibility with an existing de-facto/industry standard, that might
be included. But I don't think that is what you are asking for, is
it? If it is, could you let us know what the technical issues are
that should be documented?
Margaret
At 6:53 PM -0700 8/25/05, Stuart Cheshire wrote:
It is not typical for us to make statements in our standards
regarding what proprietary mechanisms our standards are or are not
intended to compete with, nor do we typically include statements that
compare the features of our standards to proprietary protocols.
Please stop calling it "proprietary". The mDNS specificiation is publicly
available, and is the result of many years of open public discussion.
There are multiple independent open source implementations. Just because
a certain IETF inner circle decided to turn their backs on it doesn't
make it proprietary.
Stuart Cheshire <cheshire(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
* Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer, Inc.
* www.stuartcheshire.org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf