RE: We need an architecture, not finger pointing.

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

 



> AFAIK everything I've talked about is described in an RFC somewhere. Indeed,
> the problem isn't that it's not there, it's that there's too much and it's
> difficult for inexerienced people to match up the right capabilities and
> architecture to solve a given problem.

That may well be so.   It may be that all that's needed (by me anyway) is a document of some sort that points out where all this stuff is.  Having read the SMTP documents pretty closely recently, there is definitely a substantial amount of stuff in there that I don't see implemented in systems that are available to me.   However, I am fairly sure that there are in fact gaps in the docs in terms of the features i want to see.   Even if I'm wrong, I think it's worth going through the exercise of figuring that out.   By which I do not mean "go do some work for me."   I'm interested in this and willing to do work, but as I'm sure you've gathered, I do not have a complete picture of what's been documented and what hasn't been.





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