> Another approach is to not rely so heavily on one giant uber-tree > that MUST be correct on the first try and never change.
I agree that an uber tree stands to make things worse. Distinct modules have distinct namespaces and no collisions concerns. But even better than that, distinct modules promote competition. I have no issues with there existing modules with overlapping concerns, even when implemented simultaneously by the same server. I'm projecting, but it seems that the uber tree approach would put a freeze to such experimentation, which is fine for a specific project to hoist onto itself, but seems inappropriate for a standards organization. Again, I like the idea of relocatable modules, as it seems to allow coexistence of both options. Kent // as a contributor
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
