Indeed. People polled after the election said they put Moral Values as the #1 priorty. I see no reason why the previous and next administration won't make a morality section a requirement in all published docs.
The immorality of NATs for example... Is it April already? What did I miss? Ole Ole J. Jacobsen Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal Academic Research and Technology Initiatives, Cisco Systems Tel: +1 408-527-8972 GSM: +1 415-370-4628 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, James M. Polk wrote: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-farrel-rtg-morality-requirements-00.txt > > I do not see why this ID should be limited to the Routing area... > > The Application of General Internet specifications should consider the > Operations and Management of the Security surrounding Transport of morality > considerations, even if in a Sub-IP moral zone. > > nuff said? > > cheers, > James > > ******************* > Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
