[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue



+1 to move the discussion forward.  I don’t love it but its fine as a working name.

 

From: ogpx-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ogpx-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Morgaine
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 12:56 PM
To: ogpx at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue

 

 

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Joshua Bell <josh at lindenlab.com> wrote:


Can list participants agree to VWRAP as "not perfect, but good enough" and move past the name issue to real interop work?


I vote +1 for this to move us ahead.

The group name doesn't matter too much, and even if a de facto name sticks, it's still got the Region/Agent part to it which is very appropriate and distinguishes it from other protocols.



Morgaine.



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