> From: Scott W Brim [mailto:sbrim@xxxxxxxxx] > There are occasions when limiting the number of deployed > solutions is very good for the future of the Internet, and in > those cases, pushing for Foo even when Bar is just as good is > quite legitimate. I have no argument at all when the IESG suggests a previously deployed approach over an undeployed approach or promotes one deployed approach over another or one undeployed approach over another. What I do have a real problem with is being told that I have to adopt approach which depends on undeployed infrastructure when there is an alternative approach that does not require new infrastructure. It is only common sense to tell people not to reinvent TCP. Telling people that they have to wait for the existing DNS infrastructure to support new record types is not an acceptable demand. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf