> Looks like it will be integrated into the next version of IE
> [Like
> anyone is still using it after last weeks list of bugs!]. Looks
> like
> this should be fun to hack at..Hm...I'm guessing that future
> versions
> of the Microsoft firewall product will let CDF through? I wish
> Microsoft had a clue.
>
> Anyone have more detailed info?
>
> Anton Rager
> arager @
McGraw-Hill .
com
>
Dems fiten words Anton!!
1. Since when is it unreasonable for anyone to propose a standard, of
any kind, especially when some other companies are proposing a standard
of their own?? The RFC process is not what it used to be, although the
recent movement in the stock markets may well bring the RFC process back
in line. As long as a published RFC can equal Venture Capital...
2. Duh, for all we know every Firewall that allows HTTP and meta tags
will allow CDF through?? I think you need to put your reputation on the
line here Anton and give us some insight as to why you suspect this
particular multicast protocol and not any of the others? (small hint
here Anton, CDF isn't a protocol).
3. Which clue are you alluding to Anton? Sorry, but where is the problem
here that Pointcast doesn't already represent? Are you simply against IP
multicasting or do you have something in particular you don't like about
XML?? or do you have big problems with MIME? Which is it?
4. If Netscape can incorporate an experimental draft (RFC1867) into its
production browser product, thereby making it virtually mandatory for
web products to try and implement an experimental draft, why can't
Microsoft implement a new meta tag support mechanism?
I have to agree with Todd here, looks like you are trolling for a story
with not to many facts in your head. Trying to pick up on the hype
surrounding Microsoft are we? By the way, how many versions of Netscape
v2.0 were there in a two week period of time last fall when Princeton
found the java exploits?
> Cheers,
> Russ
> R.C. Consulting, Inc. - NT/Internet Security
>
> NTBugTraq mailing list:
> Send SUBSCRIBE NTBUGTRAQ Yourname to Listserv @
rc .
on .
ca
>
|
|
