To:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Cc:
"'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com>
Date:
Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:35:29 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B845F@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: WG Discussion Summary with Draft Document Impact
At 6:46 AM -0400 8/9/01, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: >existed. Even in their most current review, the IESG did not provide any >comments suggesting more generalization. > >If anyone wants a more generalized requirements draft, I suggest writing >another draft. I agree. The IESG has already commented once and gave us specific comments. This doesn't mean that the IESG won't send back more comments, but let's not try to draw them out. (At the same time, we don't want to try to sneak anything past 'em.) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NAI Labs Phone: +1 443-259-2352 Email: lewis@tislabs.com You fly too often when ... the airport taxi is on speed-dial. Opinions expressed are property of my evil twin, not my employer.