Im not trying to be difficult, however Im getting frustrated.
The need for discovery of a proxy server is a clear need
(as represented in the charter of wrec) for real deployments.
In the absence of a chartered working group (at the time),
the authors from Microsoft, Sun, RealNetworks, and Inktomi
got together to help bring a solution. We tried to convince
netscape and others to join us, but they did not engage.
We worked together over the past year and completed the
draft as well as subsequent test implementations.
In my mind, this is so close to the definition of "open standard"
that it hurts.
Im fine if the wrec wg wants to take another crack at a new version,
but please dont ask us to sit and wait when real world scenarios
demand its use.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore@cs.utk.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 1:59 PM
> To: Josh Cohen (Exchange)
> Cc: 'Keith Moore'; Joe Touch; Ian King; jmartin@netapp.com;
> wrec@cs.utk.edu
> Subject: Re: WPAD and WREC
>
>
> > Ok, then can we at least move wpad to informational ?
>
> it's usually a good idea to document existing practice, provided
> appropriate disclaimers and security considerations are included
> in the document.
>
> Keith
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:26 MST