so: offering someone a chance to register that a conflict exists does
not serve the purpose of advancing interoperability. that is, the
information "ONION.ALT exists, see http://whatever"; is useful, whereas
the information "ONION.ALT exists, see http://someplace and/or
http://someplace_else"; is not useful. this, to me, is what FCFS means.
Really, I get that. But here's the two options:
A) registry says "ONION.ALT exists, see http://someplace and/or
http://someplace_else";, you say hm, two different packages, I better look
at both of them to see which one is installed on my computer.
B) registry says "ONION.ALT exists, see http://someplace";, you look at it
and scratch your head when you realize it's not what's on your computer so
you go do a Google search and eventually find http://someplace_else.
There is no C), since we don't control what software people write. I
don't understand why B) would be better for anyone.
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
