Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!CS.UCL.AC.UK!S.Kille
From: S.Kille@CS.UCL.AC.UK (Steve Kille)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.dev-environ
Subject: Re: En coding RFC 1006 addresses in X.500
Message-ID: <1942.632662376@UK.AC.UCL.CS>
Date: 18 Jan 90 11:32:56 GMT
References: <28626.632641878@cheetah.nyser.net>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 34


 >
 >> That's life. If ISODE had progressed Kille's proposal through normal
 >> Internet standardization channels, perhaps we could have avoided another
 >> change. 

I find this to be an amazing statement.   There is life outside the Internet.

In general, I have not been overly happy to progress work as RFCs.  I've had
to jump through too many hoops to deal with the RFCs which I've published
(this was more true of RFC 987, which came very close to not being published
as an RFC, rather than recent ones.  I am still very unhappy about the way
in which RFCs are handled).   

Secondly, despite much involvment over the last decade, I do not regard the
Internet as my "natural" community.  Publication in UK and RARE fora is a
higher priority for me.  Of course, I am keen to co-operate with the
Internet community wherever possible.

Six months back, I suggest to Phil Gross that I'd be happy to progress these
documents as RFCs, as I believed that they might be of interest to the
Internet.  There was no response, and I did not pursue the issue.  I also
suggested bringing two other documents in as RFCs, which I believe are
potentially very siginificant for the Internet:
  - The domain/X.500 paper, which proposes a basis for using X.500 in
    conjunction with DNS
  - The RARE Naming architecture, which defines most of the non-OSI-standard
    attributes being used in various Directory Pilots around the world,
    including the NYSERNET WP pilot.
I'm still happy for this to happen, but I'm not going to push it.


Steve