On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:45:39 +0300 Mykyta Yevstifeyev <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am writing to request some information regarding AFS and its current > implementations. I hope this is the right list to ask. It is, unless you want to go ask each implementation directly. > Currently the 'afs' URI scheme is registered by IANA as Provisional > with reference to RFC 1738. In the previous year there were some some > discussions in the IETF regarding what should be done with it. > However there was no consensus on any actions; two were proposed - > move the scheme to Historical category or remain it as is. I'd like > to hear the opinion of AFS experts. Does moving the scheme to Historical impact our ability to use it or provide standardization on it in the future? As far as I know, nothing uses it right now, but (just speaking for myself) I am significantly less sure that it will continue to be unused in the future. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
