Hi,
> Op 10 aug. 2015, om 10:20 heeft Lorenzo Colitti <lore...@google.com> het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Personally I doubt that in the market segment we're talking about (which
> includes many vendors that just take open source implementations, integrate
> them, and ship them) vendors will understand or care about the difference
> between an experimental RFC and a standards track RFC. Though of course, not
> being one of those vendors, my opinion is in no way authoritative.
The CPE vendor that I worked with on IPv6 features definitely wouldn't care as
long as they could sell a 'cool feature' to their customers.
> Op 10 aug. 2015, om 10:23 heeft Erik Kline <e...@google.com> het volgende
> geschreven:
>
>> Whilst not wanting to de-rail any effort to standardise Babel (since I
>> firmly believe it should be standardised), I'd like to hear the WG's
>> view on having part of our Homenet stack be on Experimental Track
>> instead of PS. E.g., would it affect vendors' willingness to implement
>> Homenet, etc?
>
> +1
>
> Especially if that got us to a place where 2-3 years from now we could
> publish {D,H}NCPbis incorporating lessons learned and whatnot as a
> Proposed Standard, I think that would be a perfectly acceptable
> outcome.
+1
Sander
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
