On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 12:06:07 -0500 Andrew Deason <[email protected]> wrote:
> At the end of the day, they're just names so it doesn't matter very > much. But the draft as it stands right now is very AFS-centric and > contains a lot of discussion of AFS-only issues, so changing that while > still having the draft make sense seems nontrivial. So... was all of this a satisfactory answer? Or do we need to discuss name changes and making this appropriate for lower layers? -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
