Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hector,
Tomorrow I'll dig through the archive and find the reference
for where we agreed that the "nomail" requirement text that was
previously in the ssp-reqs draft would be excised.
I don't recall that at all. The issue as I recall, and it was
confusing, was that it would not be part of Phillips's what seem be a
DOMAIN discovery concept. I do recall that I debated Phillip on his
out of scope statements and I recall a confusing response that it wasn't
what I thought.
But now he just admitted himself that his proposal does have provisions
to create a slot for it - whatever that means.
I seriously doubt people had a handle of what they were voting on, and I
wouldn't be surprise if it was a "follow the chieftain" vote taken.
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
