Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - DNS-Based - RMX -- After reading the archive

From: david nicol <[email-masked]>
Date: 28 Dec 2003 20:15:08 -0600

Mr DeKok:
I hope your wife has recovered fully since the beginning of November.

On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 12:44, Alan DeKok wrote:
> david nicol <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > 3: Separate (1) the mechanics of listing from (2) the semantics of what
> >    is listed and (3) when the list is to be consulted.  These three
> >    are separate issues.  The first is entirely separable from the
> >    second two, the second two are intertwined, the third being the
> >    intention of the second.
> 
>   I'm not sure what you mean by that, or what changes you would
> suggest making to the documents.

I was suggesting that proposals need not specify their mechanism
for listing hosts: I think the specification of listing mechanisms
needlessly clutters the discussion of what should be listed.

It would be nice to compare all proposals on the meaning of what is
to be listed without regard to mechanism for listing.

And also nice to compare all mechanisms for listing without regard to
discussion of what is to be listed.

The proposals all appear(ed, two months ago) to all contain both
what-is-listed-description and listing-mechanism.  This entertwinement
of solutions to two orthogonal problems makes apples-to-apples 
comparisons impossible.

In case anyone reading this wishes to undertake such a comparison,
I have built you a tool: Please feel free to use, or to refer others
to, for use, the feature matrix editor I have implemented at

 http://www.tipjar.com/rcgi/featurematrix/matrix

It is designed to help lay out product v. feature matrices in HTML.

At your service,

David Nicol

-- 
david nicol
Late to bed and late to rise makes it difficult to quote Poor Richard.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg