On 12/03/2012 04:21 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
"Stephen" == Stephen Farrell
<stephen(_dot_)farrell(_at_)cs(_dot_)tcd(_dot_)ie> writes:
Stephen> On 12/03/2012 02:50 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> I'd really prefer if we'd talk about open source being desirable,
>> but not having it be necessary.
Stephen> Yep. I got another comment to that effect as well. I'll
Stephen> try address that (but that's not done yet).
For myself, I think the requirement for open-source is very good for
this experiment, or something like it.
People can examine the open-source implementation and consider the
question of whether the implementation explores enough of the edge cases
that a process short-cut is appropriate. I think that's important in
this, so I'd be a lot more comfortable with this with an open-source
requirement.
Me too. But I guess others are concerned about that. Anyway, if/when
this gets an IETF LC, we can see if the wording's ok for folks.
Cheers,
S.