william(at)elan.net wrote:
IETF did not bow under pressing and used bad standard format
but instead disbanded the WG when they saw that technical
problems were such that they could not be reconciled.
JFTR, violating RfC 2418 chapter 4. And if I hear that CLEAR,
MASS, and SPF WGs were rejected I'm actually on Phill's side.
Unless that was some kind of misunderstanding. Compare the
IESG charter RfC 3710 chapter 4.3 with RfC 2418, it's a shame.
I wonder how long it takes until there are more RfCs dealing
with the IETF bureaucracy than RfCs about Internet problems.
It wasn't Verisign or MicroSoft who started the "shuffling
those deck chairs" thread (inspired by the MARID disaster).
It would have been much smarter if IBM actually chose
CPM/8080 from the start instead of choosing its badly
designed clone QDOS
DOS 1 was very similar to CP/M. They fixed this in DOS 2 by
adopting some "advanced" UNIX stuff like a file system with
subdirectories. I still think that I18N was a DOS invention,
and editing config.sys was more elegant than building kernels.
Sure, some hacks like TSRs were FUBAR, but DOS wasn't too bad
before the 80386.
CP/M was really good os for its days
The days before DOS 3.2 maybe. That's ancient history today.
But while we don't agree on CP/M, PC DOS, and the IETF <eg> the
new SPF RR makes sense for me. Even if it won't fly very soon.
Bye, Frank