I am ok to any of two names which make sense:
Remote unknown VPN ( RUK-VPN) or On-demand VPN

Thanks and Regards,
Yogendra Pal
Ericsson, India
+919686202644

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Stephen Hanna <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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
>



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

Reply via email to