Hi Eliot, > I think this looks pretty good. Vince, Heiner, and Hongbin have suggested > that the document be split. That's an interesting idea as far as it goes, but > one could argue that the best approach would be to not split into two > documents, but instead into perhaps one or two per approach, thus providing > for a means of evolving the understanding of each approach independently. > Apart from the rest of this conversation, I¹ll just point out that all proposals have already been explicitly invited to submit their proposals as IRTF RRG RFCs. So far, I¹ve got two proposals that have expressed interest. > > What do people want to do next with this group? > I agree with the follow-on mail suggesting that this is up to Aaron. Regards, Tony
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
