this formulation does not take into account the transfer
of responsibility and authority for policy increasingly
to NSF and to the so-called Federal Networking Council
after about 1988. NSF's role increased substantially
with the creation of the NSFNET.
In any case the principal point is that the
> From: Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> Conformance discussions like the current one have been regular fodder for
> Internet mailing lists for, perhaps, 15 years. They crop up every couple
> of years. The group "script" for the discussion is highly consistent.
> ...
It's a syndrome
At 07:55 AM 1/24/2002 -0800, Ed Gerck wrote:
>So, the really principal point behind the conformance
>discussion (which, BTW, I think should be about how to
>make non-conformance public rather than certifying
>conformance) is that these other factors must now be
>introduced in order for trust to be
vint cerf wrote:
> this formulation does not take into account the transfer
> of responsibility and authority for policy increasingly
> to NSF and to the so-called Federal Networking Council
> after about 1988. NSF's role increased substantially
> with the creation of the NSFNET.
Yes. Other poi
Ari Ollikainen wrote:
> At 6:53 PM -0800 1/23/02, Ed Gerck wrote:
> >
> >In addition, within the last ten years the Internet has changed radically
> >from a centrally controlled network to a network of networks -- with no
> >control point whatsoever. There is, thus, further reason to doubt the
