[ietf-nntp] Need to start (and finish!) the SASL draft
Clive D.W. Feather
clive at demon.net
Mon May 3 08:26:48 PDT 2004
Jeffrey M. Vinocur said:
> I tend to be in favor of splitting when reasonably possible, when some
> parts are likely to be stable but others may turn over more rapidly. I'm
> thinking in particular of being stuck in the situation where we publish an
> updated version of STARTTLS or SASL, and have to obsolete only a portion
> of an existing document. It seems cleaner to me to be able to have
> separate tracks for things that are likely to need revision.
I can see this, but I'm not sure it's a valid argument.
Currently we have five extensions (three in the core document, TLS,
AUTHINFO). Even if one of them needs modifying at some point in the future,
that's only two documents for people to read rather than five. After that,
a consolidated changes document is possible. And do we really anticipate
that many changes, given how hard it is to change Usenet?
Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive at demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert | Home: <clive at davros.org> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc | |
More information about the ietf-nntp