IAFA: PLEASE ... or we will probably use

Markus Stumpf <stumpf@informatik.tu-muenchen.de> Tue, 22 March 1994 01:19 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18358; 21 Mar 94 20:19 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18354; 21 Mar 94 20:19 EST
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05248; 21 Mar 94 20:19 EST
Received: by mocha.bunyip.com (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA02330 on Mon, 21 Mar 94 18:54:38 -0500
Received: from tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA02324 (mail destined for /usr/lib/sendmail -odq -oi -fiafa-request iafa-out) on Mon, 21 Mar 94 18:52:32 -0500
Received: from hprbg5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de ([]) by tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de with SMTP id <326464>; Tue, 22 Mar 1994 00:48:32 +0100
Received: by hprbg5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de id <311468>; Tue, 22 Mar 1994 00:48:21 +0100
Subject: IAFA: PLEASE ... or we will probably use
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Markus Stumpf <stumpf@informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
To: iafa@bunyip.com
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 1994 00:48:09 +0100
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL6]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1237
Message-Id: <94Mar22.004821mesz.311468@hprbg5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de>


I know you are all very busy and the Seattle IETF is near, but I really
think we should have a corrected and working draft out real soon now.

I think we have already lost a big and enthusiastic part of the
user community with the Linux users, as they have their own "lsm"
format and on the X11 groups it is currently discussed to reorganize
ftp.x.org and there are some volunteers to index all the files and
one proposal is to use lsm.

If, IMHO, we will not have a corrected draft SOON, we won't need
it as it will be a standard no one will ever use, as there will be
others that ARE used and are de facto standards.

Also we have locally some users that maintain our FTP archive.
They have created up to now about 1800 AFA SOFTWARE files. Because
of the uncertainess (sp?) of the current draft we decided to stay
at the format used by the one before that and it's becoming harder
and harder to motivate them writing old index files that they
have to convert some time.


 Markus Stumpf                        Markus.Stumpf@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE