From: RJ Atkinson (rja@extremenetworks.com)
Date: 12/13/02-08:36:06 AM Z
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:36:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Proposed charter addition for NFS Version 4 Working Group From: RJ Atkinson <rja@extremenetworks.com> Message-Id: <36D64548-0EA8-11D7-BE1C-00039357A82A@extremenetworks.com> On Thursday, Dec 12, 2002, at 19:09 America/Montreal, Talpey, Thomas wrote: > At 04:41 PM 12/12/2002, RJ Atkinson wrote: >> OK, so there is implementation experience that RPC is the only thing >> that needs changed. Could we please at least write the charter >> modification text to limit potential damage (I mean, changes) to >> the RPC layer ? > > Huh? _Charter_ an implementation choice?? Many IETF WGs have been chartered with narrow charters permitting a narrow scope of work (change foo but not bar in order to make frobnitz work over some new technology). Folks other than me have agreed that it is feasible to do this with changes being restricted to the RPC layer, which provides greater stability to the NFS spec, promotes good modularity, and should reduce the interoperability impact of changes. It is pretty commonly done in the IETF. Ran
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:50:41 AM Z CST