Re: Why one port?

[Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>]

At 1:20 AM +0100 2003/02/24, J-F C. (Jefsey)  Morfin wrote:

>  I understand that. Seems very much as teaching the market before
>  making a market study. Lack of pre-brainstorming. May explain all
>  the post-braintearing? May be the reason why the DNS.2 still
>  expected?

	See 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ymbk-6to4-arpa-delegation-00.txt> 
and <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-moore-6to4-dns-03.txt>.

	The way Internet Drafts work is to throw out some ideas, get 
comments back, then work those into future editions of the draft.  If 
you ever get to the point where things have gelled sufficiently to 
turn this into an RFC (informational or otherwise), the document 
continues to live, at least in some form.  If not, it dies after a 
while and is retracted.


	So, if you have an idea, write it up as an ID, and start using 
the process.  Otherwise, it seems to me that you're wasting your time 
and ours.

>  Frankly, don't you think there are far more competent people than
>  me on this list to write a draft on such a matter?

	Maybe, but you seem to care so passionately about this issue 
(whatever it is), that you would seem to be the person best suited to 
take on this task.


	Remember, open source only works because it is a result of 
someone having an itch that they feel they have to scratch, not 
because they're the objectively best people to solve the problem in 
question.

	You've got an itch, and I'd suggest that you just go ahead and 
scratch it, instead of moaning to us that you can't find anyone else 
to scratch it for you.

>                                                      However this
>  topic belongs to the dot-root project and such a draft is foreseen
>  on an information basis. But not before months, after the iterative
>  specification mechanism I descirbed; and probably a few
>  pre-testings. Also by a team including a better English writer that
>  me :-). But I certainly want to share in it.

	If you want to assign this topic somewhere else and wait for them 
to do something about it, that's fine.  But then I'd suggest that you 
actually do that, and not continue to spend your time by wasting ours.

>  Or may be would you want to discuss it privately and try to build
>  a draft with a few other interested? My approach is user centered,
>  list all what we want first.

	You could do that, too.

	All I ask is that you go ahead and do whatever it is you're going 
to do, and once you've got an ID together, we can then come back to 
review it and comment on it.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
     -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.