Re: Last Call: draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns (Multicast DNS) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed Nov 18 15:41:18 2009, Cullen Jennings wrote:

Can someone walk me through the pro/cons of this being standards track vs informational?

Cons:

For one thing, it's a lot of work to make a specification like this up to the quality of the standards-track.

Some of the 20 or so mentions of Apple™ and its trademarks may be removed during the standardization work. It's much harder to get away with using apple.com™ for most of the example domains, for instance.

The standards track doesn't mean anything anymore. It's so last decade. mDNS™ only really needs an RFC number, and a couple of trendy (preferably French™-sounding) product names carefully placed in the document.

What if changes are demanded by those annoying DNS experts? That might break backwards compatibility with the existing deployment, starting from Apple™ Jaguar™ OS X™ 10™, in case I've not mentioned that in a few paragraphs.

Pros:

Only really annoying old stick-in-the-muds would think of anything positive to come out of making a consensus-driven, interoperable standards-track specification, which'd be almost completely out of the control of a single entity.

Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx - xmpp:dwd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
 - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]