>> It's not NetBSD's accepted solution.

>Why not?  Where are policies like this written so folks like me can find
>out about them before having otherwise good ideas shot down with a
>simple "we don't do that" reply?  Is NetBSD somehow "special", or
>"above" solutions others consider perfectly acceptable?  Who creates,
>approves, and modifies all these policies of NetBSD's?

Primarily, the people who do the work.  if there's disagreement
between the people who do the work, we thrash it out and arrive at
some decision -- if the developers dont reach a clear consensus, then
from the Core group.

I dont think Todd is completely correct here, btw: we have XNS support
in the kernel but we no longer have xnsrouted, making it damn hard to
acutally _do_ anything with it.

OTOH, it may be there only as a placeholder 'till it's reworked to be
bug-compatible with IPX (whcih is remarkably similar, with the
exception of a few details like must-be-zero fields, and a checksum
algorithm which was _intended_ to be the same, but wasn't.)

There are many people with different ideas about NetBSD's target
audience, where we should go, what's "right". When you start doing
some of the work and get experience in a particular area, that at
least gets you a voice...