- From: Ted Hardie <hardie@thornhill.arc.nasa.gov>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 09:17:08 -0800
- To: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>, http working group <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>
On Mar 18, 1:17am, Yaron Goland wrote: > Subject: RE: Unverifiable Transactions / Cookie draft > There is an interesting assumption being made that protocols have the > right to dictate user interface to software makers. Am I the only one > who finds this development disturbing? Not because I am overly concerned > about protocols dictating UI, the protocol will be roundly ignored and > compliance will be coincidental at best, but rather that by dictating > requirements in areas clearly beyond the scope of a wire protocol, the > authority of the protocol group is lessened. > > Yaron IETF working groups are not limited to wire protocols, and the close relationship in the past between the User Services Directorate and the Applications Directorate reflects the idea that the use of the protocols must be taken into account in their design. Ultimately it is up to the Area Directors and the IESG to make a call on whether a particular requirement belongs in a protocol. By advancing this proposal, I believe that they have agreed that the requirement belongs. It is possible, of course, that had they heard this discussion earlier that they would have had different opinions, but the ability to time travel is not yet a requirement to become an Area Director. regards, Ted Hardie NASA NIC NB: I am not in this message speaking for NASA. --
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 1997 10:04:09 UTC