Re: OPES charter proposal again.

To: Lloyd Wood <L.Wood at eim.surrey.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: OPES charter proposal again.
From: "Michael W. Condry" <condry at intel.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 08:21:14 -0700
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian at HURSLEY.IBM.COM>, ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0107050109110.6712-100000@phaestos.ee.surrey .ac.uk>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010704170018.022c35a0@FMSMSX63.intel.com>

Sorry for being brief.

At 01:11 AM 7/5/2001 +0100, Lloyd Wood wrote:

On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Michael W. Condry wrote:

> If the working group wants to endorse iCAP I will discuss this
> with ECMA

I'm lost. What working group?

The "working group" below refers to the group
of people participating in the "proposed working group OPES".

> - HOWEVER, team members have made it clear
> that an ECMA vs IETF game is not desired. If ECMA honors
> the IETF process then they will do that otherwise I doubt
> if OPES team members will bother working on
> "cleaning up" iCAP as they have been doing recently.

I'm lost. who is this 'team'?


The team is the people interested in the OPES concepts
that have been attending the BOFs and interim meetings.

L.
and is standards lobbying taking a backseat to protocol revision?
<L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>


Michael W. Condry
Director,  Network Edge Technology

References:
- Re: OPES charter proposal again.
  - From: Michael W. Condry

Prev by Date: Re: OPES charter proposal again.
Next by Date: Fw: Should we post this? (fwd)
Previous by thread: Re: OPES charter proposal again.
Next by thread: Re: OPES charter proposal again.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: OPES charter proposal again.

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.