On 12/03/2012 04:21 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: >>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Stephen> On 12/03/2012 02:50 PM, Barry Leiba wrote: > >> I'd really prefer if we'd talk about open source being desirable, > >> but not having it be necessary. > > Stephen> Yep. I got another comment to that effect as well. I'll > Stephen> try address that (but that's not done yet). > > For myself, I think the requirement for open-source is very good for > this experiment, or something like it. > > People can examine the open-source implementation and consider the > question of whether the implementation explores enough of the edge cases > that a process short-cut is appropriate. I think that's important in > this, so I'd be a lot more comfortable with this with an open-source > requirement. Me too. But I guess others are concerned about that. Anyway, if/when this gets an IETF LC, we can see if the wording's ok for folks. Cheers, S. > > >