IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: the latest draft, LPR-LPD

leo j mclaughlin iii <ljm@ftp.com> Wed, 18 March 1992 18:56 UTC

Received: from nri.nri.reston.va.us by ietf.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00306; 18 Mar 92 13:56 EST
Received: from nri.reston.va.us by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17764; 18 Mar 92 13:57 EST
Received: from inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17636; 18 Mar 92 13:54 EST
Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA27584; Wed, 18 Mar 92 10:45:30 -0800
Received: by nsl.pa.dec.com; id AA25422; Wed, 18 Mar 92 09:21:16 -0800
Received: by nsl.pa.dec.com; id AA25387; Wed, 18 Mar 92 09:19:03 -0800
Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA23129; Wed, 18 Mar 92 09:16:45 -0800
Received: from ljm.leather-lace.ftp.com by ftp.com via PCMAIL with DMSP id AA17916; Wed, 18 Mar 92 12:17:22 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1992 12:17:22 -0500
Message-Id: <9203181717.AA17916@ftp.com>
To: BRUCE@umdd.umd.edu
Subject: Re: the latest draft, LPR-LPD
From: leo j mclaughlin iii <ljm@ftp.com>
Reply-To: ljm@ftp.com
Cc: print-wg@pa.dec.com
Sender: ljm@ftp.com
Repository: babyoil.ftp.com
Originating-Client: leather-lace.ftp.com

>
>It was a real injustice to the Internet community that RFC-1179 ever got out
>there in the first place.  However, just because it is out there, is no
>excuse to perpetuate a bad idea....

No, but because it is working better than the BSD 4.3 code for over 100,000
users is an excellent reason to perpetuate an idea....

>After all, it wasn't on the standards track.  

Nor will the new LPR rfc.  Nor is X.  Nor is NFS.  Most of the traffic in
the Internet universe are defacto standards, not standards by fiat.

>Interoperability is important.

Full agreement.  RFC 1179 was fully interoperable with the BSD 4.3 code.
It is essential that RFC-XXXX be fully interoperable with 1179 and 4.3.

enjoy,
leo j mclaughlin iii
ljm@ftp.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email