On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 12:43:13PM -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
Ideally, IETF's role is to provide advice that helps the Internet and
Internet-based protocols work well. Merely blessing things that do not work
well is not playing a leadership role.
Let us look at the case of mDNS. Apple has actively listened to the
advice it has been given and worked within the limits of its deployed
base to make alterations. If the IETF had been a little more
responsive, actually, the deployed-base problems might not have been
so bad (this is not to say that the IETF bears all the responsibility
for how this document has languished, note: the authors have not
always been quick to respond either). What else do we want from our
standards procedure?
It seems to me that the documents should therefore be published. It
is IMO better that they be published on the standards track, but who
cares? The distinction between Informational and Standards Track when
a document actually is a protocol is one that IETF arcana fans and
nobody else in the universe cares about.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)shinkuro(_dot_)com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf