On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:36:31AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote:
> [DNS opcode DISCOVER]
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Paul Vixie wrote:
> >yes, it has.
> >
> >> why, under $DIETIES green earth would you want to push a dead
> >> technology? The IESG is dead-set against this.
> >
> >because the IESG has turned over N times during those 8 years, and the idea
> >is still solid and useful and interesting, and the current proposed RFC is
> >experimental, and most importantly, because the need for it will continue
> >to
> >resurface until we push it over the top of the hill and roll it down to the
> >town.
>
> The problem was, AFAIR, that allocating opcodes requires a Standards
> Action. No experimental spec can do that. If DISCOVER is to be
> revived it will need to use one of other publication processes.
>
> --
> Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
of course, the justification for requiring a Standards Track action
for the allocation of an opcode was never questioned. the impediment
that such a requirement places on development is so onerous that many
folks just ignore the IETF's strictures and don't bring their work
to that forum. Who was it that promoted an RFC on getting allocations
for experimental use? Can't remember who that was, but it was a little
to late. DISCOVER is in no shape to be a full-fledged Standards track
item. It IS an idea that is worthy of further use/experimentation to
see if it can be integrated into a data-driven networking architecture.
And for that reason, it is worthy of an opcode assignment. But, thats
my opinion and we know what that is worth.
--bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
