[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: users and connections definitions
> From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
> >Cannot do that with an ISO document. If we didn't reference an ISO
> >document in the RFC, then we didn't expect anyone to read it to
> >understand the work.
>
> We all assume various levels of background info in our writing, and
> not all of it is on-line.
Maybe you do, but don't include me. I like well-defined RFCs.
> Actually, I think the PSRG I-D was well written, but did not advance
> because other matters were a higher priority. But, feel free to judge for
> you self. I'm sending an MS Word file that reproduces the essence of this
> work, in a newly edited form, that Rob Shirey developed for puiblication
> last year, via a separate message to you.
>
I wondered what that 356 KB message was. Since I don't own MS Word,
it's worse than useless, and I can safely toss it. Thanks, anyway, and
let us know when the I-D comes out....
> Bill, when you get to set my priorities, it's time to find a new job!
>
Actually, it's about time.
We need someone willing to revise the drafts to meet our implementors'
consensus, with a turnaround time of something less than 2 months....
WSimpson@UMich.edu
Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
BSimpson@MorningStar.com
Key fingerprint = 2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3 59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2
Follow-Ups: