>> I'd have to check my notes to be certain, but I think that the WG
>> discussed this in San Francisco and decided not to make it a WG doc.
> not having been in San Francisco I do not know what the decision(oops?)
> was based upon, but here are some comments and more detailed remarks
> below:
> ...
> So, finally, based on the information currently available I'd agree that
> the draft not be adopted by the WG. An update of RFC 1101 would be
> interesting, though.
<ad hat on>
what i would most appreciate is one of
o a statement by the wg that this is being taken on as a work item
o a statement by the wg that this is NOT being taken on as a work
item, but the wg has no problem with its publication as info
o a statement by the wg that this should not be published for some
stated set of reasons, or that it could be published but with a
warning (text included).
randy, just tryin' to process a document
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
