I don't think this is an issue worth objecting to.
Complexity exists at many levels. There is complexity of specification and
complexity of implementation. The two are not the same.
I can imagine two reasons why I might want to have ASN.1 in XML. The first is
that I want to use a single set of
Hi -
From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fred Baker [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:45 AM
Subject: RE: Protest: Complexity running rampant
...
DER would not have been so bad if they had chosen
At 9:49 AM -0500 2/19/07, John C Klensin wrote:
For the record, I would have no problems with Informational or Experimental
publication of this collection -- it is the proposed decision to standardize
that bothers me.
When I first discussed publication of this with the IESG, I pointed out that
My attention has recently been drawn to this set of documents:
- draft-legg-xed-asd
- draft-legg-xed-asd-gserei
- draft-legg-xed-asd-xerei
- draft-legg-xed-rxer
- draft-legg-xed-rxer-ei
It's, as far as I can tell, an attempt at a complete reimplementation of
ASN.1 using XML.
I was very
On Feb 19, 2007, at 1:55 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
My attention has recently been drawn to this set of documents:
- draft-legg-xed-asd
- draft-legg-xed-asd-gserei
- draft-legg-xed-asd-xerei
- draft-legg-xed-rxer
- draft-legg-xed-rxer-ei
It's, as far as I can tell, an attempt at a complete
--On 19. februar 2007 02:40 -0800 Fred Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 19, 2007, at 1:55 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
My attention has recently been drawn to this set of documents:
- draft-legg-xed-asd
- draft-legg-xed-asd-gserei
- draft-legg-xed-asd-xerei
- draft-legg-xed-rxer
-
--On Monday, February 19, 2007 11:45 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having not read the above and not really caring much what
happens in the layers up in the stratosphere as long as its
designers don't by its sheer weight make the application
unusable, is it a bad
On 2/19/07, John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the record, I would have no problems with Informational or
Experimental publication of this collection -- it is the
proposed decision to standardize that bothers me.
Exactly. Under no circumstances should it ever be OK to use IETF
Fred Baker wrote:
is it a bad thing to provide
the expressive nature of ASN.1 in a human-readable and popular data
representation?
The one thing IETF standardization certainly ought to imply is that there is a
real constituency interesting in using the specification in the near-term.
The one thing IETF standardization certainly ought to imply is that there
is a real constituency interesting in using the specification in the near-term.
Dave,
Why is near term an essential requirement? If the Internet designers had
opted for the
near term, we would all be running some
Bob Braden wrote:
Why is near term an essential requirement? If the Internet designers
had opted for the
near term, we would all be running some flavor of X.25 today.
Research vs. engineering.
Standards are for engineering. When they don't solve near-term problems they
tend not to
Dave Crocker wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:
is it a bad thing to provide
the expressive nature of ASN.1 in a human-readable and popular data
representation?
The one thing IETF standardization certainly ought to imply is that
there is a real constituency interesting in using the specification
12 matches
Mail list logo
