At 12:14 AM +0200 7/19/06, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
\>> Should we
barter away good current functionality because there's not an RFC for
rsync?
Nope. I would hope that the RFC Editor would have an rsync server
available. But that's different than mandating one when we can't
really say what an rsync server is at any particular point in time
(the protocol has changed over time).
I think that in a contractual situation, 'hope' isn't enough to keep us
out of trouble.
Good point.
And I'd be reasonably happy if we specified 'any version of rsync greater
than X.Y.Z', or some such. The current debian stable version (2.6.4-6)
would work for me.
Saying "rsync version 2.6 or later" works for me, as long as we
understand the "can't eat our own dogfood" aspect of this requirement.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf