Re: Algorithms to generate permutations
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 09:49:06 -0700
"Terry Ritter" <email@example.com> wrote
>> The best technology doesn't necessarily make the best
>> standards. To be a good standard, there should be a way
>> for a large number of products to be interoperable. In most
>> cases, that happens more readily if there are no patent
> I have a fundamental problem believing
> that cryptography should be "interoperable,"
> because the whole point of keys is to make
> ciphers NON-interoperable.
Those who don't need interoperability can just ignore AES
and do whatever they want.
- Re: Alternatives to Corba Notification service
... (though there are a few things that need to be clarified by the spec ... to make interoperability easier "out-of-the-box"). ... I don't fault the OMG for attempting to standardize this ... As for your conclusion about standards, ...
- Re: OSI not quite dead yet
... >> This used to be the case with the IETF when standards were written ... >demonstrate two interoperable implementations ... ... seriously God takes interoperability. ...
- Re: Microsoft Courts Red Hat
... Microsoft's general manager of interoperability and standards. ... Microsoft refusing to actually obey existing RFCs. ... Copyright 2007 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, ...
- Re: Fortran Vs C, C++, C#
... And a lot of standards committee's time as well. ... J3 is spending a lot of time on "Further Interoperability with C" ... and is working with the MPI Fortran binding subgroup. ...
- Re: Free Standards or Not?
... We encounter quite a few questions on comp.dsp that are along those lines. ... But, more realisticly, standards often define an interface that presupposes an underlying infrastructure, and an infrastructure loosely equates to implementation. ... If you've ever worked in the development of a standard you should know that the goal is to tell as little as possible beyond what is needed for interoperability. ...