On 7/8/2011 7:21 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Firstly, what I proposed above is fixing specs to align with what is already in
wide use.
Right. I understood that. And it's a reasonable goal.
But it was not the reason for starting YAM. And as stated, it is broader than
the similar, derivative goal that YAM did have, to make the "easy" changes.
In other words, you are targeting a goal that is serious work and actually has
little to do with the reason that YAM was pursued. As stated, I believe your
goal is close to that of DRUMS.
Many IETF WGs when
recharter end up doing things specifically prohibited by their previous
Charters. So your comment about "non-goal for this group" doesn't make any sense
to me.
This is not a 'continuation' of YAM. If your suggestion is rechartering, then
it essentially re-uses a working group name for a significantly different task.
Besides a slight taste of bait-and-switch, the deeper question is whether the
considerable effort to do this revision effort is viewed as worth the
considerable effort it will take, especially in comparison with other email
tasks the IETF might pursue?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
