Re: Openness, change control, future protocol revisions

At 10:45 PM  -0700 5/9/96, Bennet Yee wrote:
>Myself, I'd prefer to see this WG (or a subsequent
>one) specify some minimal core API (for Unix, Windows, and MacOS), so
>that we wouldn't run into these problems in the future, or at least
>run into them once for everybody rather than multiply in various
>different ways for various vendors / freeware implementations.

I'm uncomfortable with this. Hasn't IETF's experience with defining API's
(as opposed to protocols) been poor? Someone else want to comment on their
specific  experience of trying to define APIs through an IETF standards

..Christopher Allen                  Consensus Development Corporation..
..<>                 1563 Solano Avenue #355..
..                                             Berkeley, CA 94707-2116..
..<>             o510/559-1500  f510/559-1505..

Received on Friday, 10 May 1996 01:58:27 UTC