Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt

Hi Moonesamy,

I also think similar with Carpenter, why reclassify to historic.
rfc2050 is still valid, and why limiting the ietf?

AB

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, (continued) Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, John C Klensin Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Randy Bush Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, David Conrad Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Dave Crocker Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Randy Bush Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, David Conrad Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Randy Bush digressive rant on internet fiefdoms, Randy Bush Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Brian E Carpenter Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Arturo Servin Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Abdussalam Baryun <= Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, John C Klensin Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, David Conrad Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Lee Howard Re: I-D Action: draft-moonesamy-rfc2050-historic-00.txt, Abdussalam Baryun