bmanning@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
LLMNR has waded through the lengthy IETF standardization process to get to where it is. That Microsoft has been patient and spent the money needed to keep people on this task long enough to get it here should be rewarded with the IETF imprinture. Of course even Microsoft has hedged its bets (even they are aware of the need to ship products) wrt LLMNR. But that is no reason for the IETF to not sanction this work. --bill
How about a protocol to remotely control the explosion of bombs. It could even be built on top of LLMNR. It is not necessaryly more harmful than LLMNR. Nobody intends to build bombs anyhow not to mention remotely explode them. So would you consider publishing this protocol harmful? Terrorists - I am sorry, weapons researches have spent a lot ... We should really reward them by publishing this parodicol :) Is that what you meant? Regards Peter -- Peter and Karin Dambier Public-Root Graeffstrasse 14 D-64646 Heppenheim +49-6252-671788 (Telekom) +49-179-108-3978 (O2 Genion) +49-6252-750308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) +1-360-448-1275 (VoIP: freeworldialup.com) mail: peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://iason.site.voila.fr http://www.kokoom.com/iason _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf