IPv6 strawman plan: Re: [OpenAFS-devel] Moving Forwards

[Jeffrey Altman]

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigF958662EAD9DB61C8958D220
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 9/10/2012 3:56 AM, Simon Wilkinson wrote:
>=20
> On 10 Sep 2012, at 06:19, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
>=20
>> While you may fork the code base, you may not fork the AFS3 wire
>> protocols.
>=20
> This is just not true. There are no internet standards police. In the s=
ame way as anyone can run a service that looks like HTTP, but isn't quite=
 on port 80, there's absolutely nothing stopping Troy (or anyone else) ru=
nning a mutant filserver on port 7000. If you believe that the AFS tradem=
ark remains enforceable, you might get into trouble if you called that se=
rvice AFS - but that's not what Troy is proposing

Simon,

You are debating the difference in meaning between "can" and "may".
Troy is most certainly capable of deploying services that will break
existing deployments.  He wouldn't be the first one to do it.  However,
there isn't anyone that is going to give him permission to do so.

Jeffrey Altman



--------------enigF958662EAD9DB61C8958D220
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQTeyaAAoJENxm1CNJffh4IDwIANmt19rKCGjre74tPEYASuVN
AQ/ooqfcuRCgXXQbZ+FkEwxdLyUm17e8sv1QLAj3UU7I75lJqcRxv/kcJhuk3sEh
pbTpGWXILvAKPfO/XHaBy4RpIhEAZ4c5QbdGVapRZCR0h8ojMRPuqRF4VJbf5NZU
WqNYh6Mfk5M7QDhmO6+Gfk/Sj9Ic9g9TIG8yBjT9TbWQPyvS0I1Cm+pBaxgymrVD
XqFpNp2a2o+saCJo0/EZJIx63rVJvwHnM4/G48tneNAAvSZpfYfvwzauKKDp+J07
90t7J8uJaukzSFq4NNvGCUt6f5W3Hdi1fSQ8ikQQwNVMkK2upSAu2MZWqoY3Zbk=
=J5Ya
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enigF958662EAD9DB61C8958D220--