On Wed, 25 May 2011, Paul Kraus wrote:
There have been a number of RFC's effectively written by one vendor in order to be able to claim "open standards compliance", the biggest corporate offender in this regard, but clearly not the only one, is Microsoft. The next time I run across one of these RFC's I'll make sure to forward you a copy.
RFC means "Request For Comment". Unless an RFC has survived the grueling standards-track process, it is no more than a documented idea put out for public comment. Indeed, the majority of RFCs fail this process, and many do not even try to enter it but simply exist to document an idea or a vendor's existing protocol. I am impressed if Microsoft still produces new ideas worthy of putting in a document.
This sort of open RFC process would be good for zfs because it provides ample paths to utter failure while winnowing out the good ideas which achieve rough consensus and interoperability.
Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
