[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: going back to stone axes
Bancroft Scott writes:
> > Sorry, but no. That is simply untrue. I have written, as I noted, a
> > [...]
> Nonsense! Explain how adding subtype constraints makes a DER or BER
> implementor's program more complex.
I explained. I gave an example, using SMTP and SNMP as examples. You
are free to believe me or disregard me. In any case, I've made this
argument before, you have made counterarguments before, and we are
unlikely to resolve this issue here and now.
> It makes sense that both sides of the arguments be aired. You may
> wish to relate the bad experiences that some have had implementing a
> couple protocols that use ASN.1, fine. But don't try to stifle
> arguments that relate the positive experiences that so many have had
> in implementing protocols that use ASN.1.
I would like, actually, to reduce both sorts of comments. They are not
advancing our work. We may have to revisit the issue later.
> Also, if you are going to invoke the voice of the chair you might want
> to be less partial.
I am being impartial. I'm saying that we are all just going over the
same old arguments -- both sides are -- and that this isn't advancing
our agenda. We probably ought to cool down and focus on requirements
and contents of certificates and attributes of retrieval protocols
more for a while.