Hi Paul,
on 2006-07-18 22:31 Paul Hoffman said the following:
At 8:27 PM +0200 7/18/06, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
Should we require that the current availability through rsync and ftp
is continued?
Maybe I'm being a bit pedantic here, but there is no RFC (or even
Internet Draft) describing rsync. Of course, running an rsync server
is trivial and certainly useful to the IETF community, but maybe we
shouldn't be mandating a protocol we haven't even started to
standardize.
I'm sorry, but in this case I think pragmatism beats purity. It
really doesn't matter a whit to me in this case that rsync hasn't been
standardized in the IETF -- it's a good tool, and the functionality is
desirable.
I guess that in this case, I don't understand your attitude. Should we
barter away good current functionality because there's not an RFC for
rsync?
Should we require all the bright ideas and application protocols in the
world to be funnelled through the IETF?
Henrik
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf