Here's the first issue. So far, it has been the most
contentious one! Interesting that it's the least
technical issue. Hmmmm.

Anyway, if you're not happy with the proposed resolution,
please suggest another. And if you support this idea,
please say so.

Thanks,

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: ipsecme issue tracker [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 6:44 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [ipsecme] #210: What should we call this effort?

#210: What should we call this effort?

 Many names were suggested but no consensus has emerged. The most popular
 candidate so far is "Auto Mesh VPN".

 Suggested Resolution: Choose Auto Mesh VPN unless another more popular
 name emerges on the email list by the end of IETF 83.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |      Owner:  draft-ietf-ipsecme-p2p-vpn-
  yaronf.ietf@…          |  problem@…
     Type:  defect       |     Status:  new
 Priority:  normal       |  Milestone:
Component:  p2p-vpn-     |   Severity:  -
  problem                |
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ipsecme/trac/ticket/210>
ipsecme <http://tools.ietf.org/ipsecme/>

_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to