Re: draft-manning-dnssvr-criteria-01.txt

Einar Stefferud <Stef@nma.com> Tue, 07 May 1996 03:44 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01841; 6 May 96 23:44 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01830; 6 May 96 23:44 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00630; 6 May 96 23:44 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01612; 6 May 96 23:44 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00808; 6 May 96 23:32 EDT
Received: from ics.uci.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00467; 6 May 96 23:32 EDT
Received: from nma.com by q2.ics.uci.edu id ad17028; 6 May 96 20:32 PDT
Received: from localhost by odin.nma.com id aa00332; 6 May 96 20:30 PDT
To: ietf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: draft-manning-dnssvr-criteria-01.txt
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 06 May 1996 16:35:00 PDT." <m0uGZo5-00083MC@rip.psg.com>
Reply-to: ietf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
X-Orig-Sender: ietf-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Einar Stefferud <Stef@nma.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <328.831439807.1@odin.nma.com>
Date: Mon, 06 May 1996 20:30:08 -0700
Message-ID: <330.831439808@odin.nma.com>
X-Orig-Sender: stef@nma.com
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.

I have to agree that the distintion between "specifying particular
implementations as opposed to desired behavior" is a very critical and
very general issue that needs to be resolved, here and elsewhere.

Cheers...\Stef

From your message Mon, 6 May 96 16:35 PDT:
}
}> I'm not sure that the list are all as interested as some of you are.
}>
}> Please send the updates/questions/flamage to the author(s) and other,
}> specific individuals that you think might have an interest. No real
}> use spaming the list eh?
}
}Until the still unresolved, and it appears not well understood, problem of
}specifying particular implementations as opposed to desired behavior has
}been resolved, this would seem to be an issue sufficiently generic to the
}specification process to interest much of the IETF.
}
}randy