RE: [rddp] Minn. meeting & draft status

[Michael Krause <krause at cup.hp.com>]

I think status can be easily accomplished via the reflector and there is
little value-add in having a in-person meeting for such
discussions.  If there are technical issues of merit to discuss,
then this warrants such a meeting but that is not what is being presented
here.

Mike

At 12:54 PM 3/1/2005, Shah, Hemal wrote:
> I agree with Tom that we need to
> meet to discuss status of various WG
> action items rather than completely canceling the WG meeting. In
> addition, at this time changing the flights at the last moment will
> not
> be possible for many of us who were planning to attend RDDP WG.
>
> Hemal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rddp-bounces at ietf.org
> [
> mailto:rddp-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Talpey, Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:25 PM
> To: Black_David at emc.com
> Cc: rddp at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rddp] Minn. meeting & draft status
>
> At 12:08 PM 3/1/2005, Black_David at emc.com wrote:
> >Since the WG Last call on the DDP, RDMAP and Security
> >drafts has completed without any technical issues, I
> >intend to cancel the RDDP WG meeting in Minneapolis,
> >unless there are other technical issues to discuss
>
> I think it would be a shame for folks who were in attendance
> anyway not to meet. There was only one hour on the agenda,
> and it seems that even a 10 minute review of the various WG
> action items and their status would be a good thing to place
> into minutes, for the record. Will IPS have any feedback for
> us to discuss?
>
> Tom.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rddp mailing list
> rddp at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp
>
> _______________________________________________
> rddp mailing list
> rddp at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp

_______________________________________________
rddp mailing list
rddp at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp