Remember that *all* server requirements are optional, so it is up to us to define Kannel WAP 2.0 gateway. But I think 2.0 should at least implement all services we have now. This means implementing at least:
a) 2.0 Gateway b) 2.0 PPG
Aarno
On 26.1.2004, at 13:07, Stipe Tolj wrote:
ok, the last meeting did had some usefull outcome IMO. Let's get this good way continued. We'd like to see you all boarded again this friday
Fri 2004-01-30, 02:30pm (CET) IRC freenode: #kannel
to get some action items and fixed points for a TODO towards WAP 2.0 compliance. Discussions in the list before the appointments are _highly_ welcome, so please do this too. The meeting is more of a way to have direct interaction with the developer entities.
Stipe
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG
M�nsterstr. 248 40470 D�sseldorf, NRW, Germany
phone: +49.211.74845.0 fax: +49.211.74845.299
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wapme-systems.de/ -------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Cygwin)
mIsEP6mcYwEEAMDnUiUwrbb+xwTFWN6TxF2+XZu7/alwJMeCwMBRvXtPZqfjpPhS OkBpU0F4TrVuugz1HINTSaJTYq10AzDQXp5NkyWgckqW79nPAWuOX0dicbJk+cN2 nM2TI4KaxUDe6u8hghNEnH/i2lXsUu9apnP/iixzV81VC2je3uc9hZpnAAYptEVT dGlwZSBUb2xqIChUZWNobm9sb2d5IENlbnRlciAmIFJlc2VhcmNoIExhYikgPHRv bGpAd2FwbWUtc3lzdGVtcy5kZT6ItAQTAQIAHgUCP6mcYwIbAwYLCQgHAwIDFQID AxYCAQIeAQIXgAAKCRABV0w1BqPYRuSqA/wPzsQxao2YePENCtgRTrO86U6zg3sl OcS6CJFI4FZP5h/xD3GRsNH1+MPSvZlomDdpFnr547DGz/Kq9MXuQwVvlVig5yWZ K5dtKp1r5YLhxJQBhfirZbRFFnYmf19f18J8OoS28tuFVftDl1AIwJS3HLyBTv6H g2HyLAEKQIp30Q== =aYCI -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
