> > where did the wrec folks get the idea that the IP specification was > > obsolete? > > (speaking not for the entire WREC, but my impression of the meetings) I > did get the impression (mistakenly or not) that addressing the whole of > the IP spec was not particularly in scope (e.g., from our area director, > who discussed scope at nearly every meeting). I would agree on that point ... but as long as wrec recognizes (correctly) that revising IP is not within its purview then it also seems reasonable for wrec to assume that things that violate IP are of dubious value. Keith
- Re: interception proxies Joe Touch
- Re: interception proxies Keith Moore
- Re: interception proxies Joe Touch
- Re: interception proxies Erik Nordmark
- Re: interception proxies Joe Touch
- Re: interception proxies Dick St.Peters
- Re: interception proxies Keith Moore
- Re: interception proxies Matt Crawford
- Re: interception proxies C. M. Heard
- Re: interception proxies Joe Touch
- Re: interception proxies Keith Moore
- Re: interception proxies John Martin
- Re: interception proxies Salvador Vidal
- Re: interception proxies Valdis . Kletnieks
- RE: interception proxies BookIII, Robert
- Re: interception proxies Joe Touch
- Re: interception proxies Vernon Schryver
- Re: interception proxies Keith Moore
- Re: interception proxies Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: interception proxies Vijay Gill
- Re: interception proxies Marc Horowitz