On 30 Aug 2012, at 20:47, Andrew Deason wrote: > On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:37:04 -0400 > Jeffrey Altman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> draft-brashear-afs3-pts-extended-names was approved by this group. >> There is nothing to do but implement it. > > That has been very unclear. This standard only seems to exist as an > expired IETF I-D, and as far as I'm aware, there was still an > outstanding rather important objection to RemoveAuthName as it exists in > the IETF archive. That's how we're leaving it?
The document ( draft-brashear-pts-extended-names-09 ) passed last call in this group, and was (and probably still is) in the Independent Submissions Editor queue. What stalled it there was a review request that more context be provided - that before publishing an RFC extending AFS-3, we should document better what AFS-3 actually is. This then opened up the whole can of worms of what we could and couldn't do based on the existing XG files and IBM documentation. But as far as this group was concerned, that document was done, and the registrars assigned code points to the RPCs as documented. We can't keep going "oh, and another thing". That's one of the main reasons nothing gets done round here. S. _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
