Subject: RE: [Mipshop] WG Last Call comments on draft-ietf-mipshop-lmm-requirements-00.txt

From: "Bound, Jim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:36:03 -0500

I think mipshop has to be compliant with this document.  If the document
is not right then make it right.  I don't support such a charter
statement at all and object strongly.

/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> On Behalf Of James Kempf
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 5:31 AM
> To: [email-masked]; Pekka Nikander
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Mipshop] WG Last Call comments on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-lmm-requirements-00.txt
> 
> 
> Gab,
> 
> > The main point, though, is that mipshop's charter does not make it 
> > mandatory for its experimental protocols to comply completely with 
> > this document. The charter says so explicitly, and this was added 
> > precisely so people would not prevent publication of the 
> protocol spec 
> > because some detail was not compliant with the requirements 
> document.
> > 
> 
> So what is the point of the requirements document then? 
> 
>             jak
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> 

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop