Comment by eqvinox
5 months ago
> Aren't there a bunch of emails and what-not about it? I think that's what people are referring to.
Sorry, what "it"/"that" is this? I'm failing to process due to unclear references.
> > Other MessagePack people could've sent a mail to the mailing list. You could've had comments relayed on the microphone for IETF meetings. Did that happen?
> Yes
Can you point to anything? Best I can find is https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/iZM_ZqA9i... but that's not particularly useful. Boils down to questioning the utility of standards...
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=messagepack
That's unhelpful to the degree that if it's any indication of MessagePack people's behaviour back then, I can see why the IETF would ignore the input.
I understand it's not easy to find things there, I tried, and I understand you might not want to spend the time to dig things up. I primarily asked since I hoped you could call something up by remembering some searchable content. If you can't, just say so and that's fine. Throwing that link at me is just rude.
All the links you want are in the post I made that was linked by TFA (IETF very annoyingly killed its URLs for some reason so you have to wayback machine a little). That, plus trying to argue IETF doesn't design by committee (which if anyone knows anything about IETF it's that) has made me assume you're just trolling me. If not, sorry! But what are you trying to add to the conversation here? Is your argument "IETF good, get involved"? It turns out someone can take yr serialization format, rename it, and standardize it entirely without your consent, so no thank you.
I'm happy to discuss stuff, even (especially) in depth, even to be your entree into this whole thing, but you gotta meet me halfway. This whole thread is me saying "hey that's my post!" Please start there.
3 replies →