Re: Options, was Re: To Be, or NR To Be ...

[tgindin@xxxxxxxxxx]

(snip)
> Although I agreed that use of the NR bit is neither necessary nor
> sufficient, in isolation, I have also given many examples of where the bit
> of of significant benefit in an overall NR scheme.

I do not recall any use of the "NR bit" in isolation and I don't think it
would be usable either.  The statement that the NR bit is neither necessary nor
sufficient to provide NR services had no indeed no opposition in this WG --
and this statement simply proves that NR services are independent of such
NR bit, q.e.d.

[Tom Gindin]   I think this is a bit of an overstatement.  While there is no, or
very little, opposition to the statement that the NR bit is not sufficient for
the NR service, it is not clear that the bit is not necessary or at least highly
desirable for the service.  And, while "highly desirable" would leave the NR
service logically independent of the NR bit, this no more establishes the
uselessness of the NR bit than the usability of X.509v1 certificates for digital
signature establishes the uselessness of the digital signature bit.

(snip)