ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [midcom] on "diversion"

2001-03-28 18:05:45
Yes, and this discussion keeps occurring at OPES as well.
Why don't we stick to our charter's and then work as a
team over time for the more generic architecture.

At 07:38 AM 3/25/2001 -0500, Scott Brim wrote:
On 24 Mar 2001 at 16:56 -0800, Eliot Lear apparently wrote:
> Do people need to be convinced that diversion is not necessary to discuss
> in ANY midcom work?

It's certainly not in scope for requirements or protocol work.  I like
having it in the conceptual framework, just as we do e.g. simple
proxies, just so we all have the same context.

...Scott


_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
midcom(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom

Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [midcom] on "diversion", Michael W. Condry <=