RE: Internet Technology Adoption and Transition

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lloyd,
At 00:57 18-04-2014, [e-mail] wrote:
>the correct url is
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-itat-report/
>no trailing minus. why cite a broken url?

I should have removed the URL instead of citing it.

>evolution in the smtp space? Um, DMARC?

I am reading "SMTP" narrowly and did not consider DMARC as part of the space.

 From 
<http://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2013/06/itat-2013_submission_5.docx>http://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2013/06/itat-2013_submission_5.docx 
examples of DNSSEC-based applications are mentioned and there is the following:

    "The DMARC wg is working on higher-level use of DKIM and SPF."

The technology for those two specifications is mostly related to DNS.

>for thoughts on http as an hourglass waist, see
>http://personal.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/publications/internet-drafts/draft-wood-dtnrg-http-dtn-delivery/lloyd-wood-turning-http-into-a-standalone-layer-ietf-75-tsvarea-slides.pdf
>- it's a little hard to see http as a waist when it's so tightly 
>coupled to tcp. That is unlikely to change, as the benefits of 
>uncoupling are for edge cases.

Thanks for the URL.  I would say yes to the comment about tightly 
coupled.  I'd say that they are seen as the transport and you end up 
with other protocols being designed on top of that.

>many involved in the ietf, myself included, began contributing as 
>grad students. As with academic paper review, it's how the 
>interested/enthusiastic/unpaid learn.

Yes.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy