This message was not delivered due to problems at our site. It is being resent.
The following is a copy of the message:
Received: from rutgers.edu (-:RUTGERS.EDU:-) by yonge.csri.toronto.edu via TCP
with SMTP id AA06487; Fri, 12 Jul 91 15:58:17 EDT
Received: from dimacs.rutgers.edu by rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.4/3.08)
id AA15716; Fri, 12 Jul 91 15:56:54 EDT
Received: by dimacs.rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.4/3.08)
id AA18125; Fri, 12 Jul 91 14:38:43 EDT
Received: from NRI.RESTON.VA.US by dimacs.rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.4/3.08)
id AA18117; Fri, 12 Jul 91 14:38:36 EDT
Received: from NRI by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17709; 12 Jul 91 14:31 EDT
To: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb(_at_)thumper(_dot_)bellcore(_dot_)com>
Subject: Re: Review and future directions
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Jul 91 14:02:41 EDT."
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 91 14:31:38 -0400
From: Greg Vaudreuil <gvaudre(_at_)nri(_dot_)reston(_dot_)va(_dot_)us>
Well, the messagebodies draft (RFC-XXXX) says explicitly in it that
people have until September to make comments that could be incorporated
into the next draft. Personally, I still like that time frame -- it
gives people time to try and implement. My hope was to have a new
draft, which would be the proposed standard, some time in October.
Just a clarification. I expect proposed standard status in or by December
91, which is later, not earlier than October 91.