Re: [XCON] Multiple Protocols: Consensus

[Adam Roach <adam at nostrum.com>]

That is my interpretation of the discussion we had and the question we
asked. Thank you for putting it more clearly than I did.

/a

Sean Olson wrote:

>I am part of that consensus and just wanted to clarify one thing. You
>mean 1 protocol and 1 binding, right? 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Adam Roach [mailto:adam at nostrum.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:07 PM
>To: xcon at ietf.org
>Subject: [XCON] Multiple Protocols: Consensus
>
>During the XCON face to face meeting on March 20, 2006, the participants
>present agreed that the protocol used to manipulate the conference state
>should have only one binding, and not several. The consensus of the
>people present was very strong.
>
>This message brings the decision to the list for discussion. Any
>objections to this decision should be raised within the next week.
>
>/a
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>XCON mailing list
>XCON at ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
>  
>


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