On Nov 24, 2010, at 12:46 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> While section 2.3 of draft-iab-extension-recs-02 can be read as very vaguely
> pointing away from this kind of extension ("[S]pecifications that look very
> similar to the original but don't interoperate with each other or with the
> original - are even more harmful to interoperability than extensions"), it
> appears to be aimed more squarely at the creation of protocol profiles by
> SDOs other than the IETF.
well, we could discuss the use of an IETF session setup protocol for instant
messaging, and the use of a protocol designed to add attributes and report on
available bandwidth within a class of traffic on a standard (eg, calculated by
a routing protocol) route to install a route. We do it to ourselves as well.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
