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.
midcom mailing list
Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology