Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!TIS.COM!galvin
From: galvin@TIS.COM (James M Galvin)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
Subject: Re: kerberos and the ISO protocol standards
Message-ID: <16365.629989412@tis.com>
Date: 18 Dec 89 13:03:32 GMT
References: <8912150831.AA21377@asylum.sf.ca.us>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: James M Galvin <galvin@TIS.COM>
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 21


	> I would like to stress that the Kerberos people have a lot of
	> experience to offer the standards activities. I would also like to
	> stress that NO ONE should be niave about submitting an existing system
	> and expecting it to be accepted as a standard without change.

	It is too bad that the "standards" efforts going on in the
	communications area are not codifying tried-and-true experience --
	which I assert is the proper and correct role of "standards" activity.
	Instead it seems that the so-called standards groups insist on
	performing reasearch.

I would offer a slightly different observation.  If we are going to criticize
"standards" activities, it is important to understand them.  In fact,
"standards" activities do try to ensure that no single commercial organization
has an advantage over any other.  If they did not, why would anyone
participate.

This is not to say I agree with them, but I would hardly call that research.

Jim