SOI ID? Humm

["Scott G. Kelly" <scott@bstormnetworks.com>]

This is a good point. The question being asked here isn't the question I
remember Barb being unwilling to call yesterday (due to lack of adequate
representation here in Yokohama), though I could have missed something.
Maybe we should let Barb and Ted frame the question for us when they are
ready...

Scott

Andrew Krywaniuk wrote:
> 
> It seems that lots of people are already willing to add their support for
> this, but I don't really understand the question.
> 
> Maybe some clarification of the poll is in order. What are we voting on
> exactly?
> 
> 1. A single SOI protocol vs. 2 protocols?
> 
> 2. A merged SOI base vs. using IKEv2 as the base?
> 
> 3. A single SOI protocol vs. continued uncertainty?
> 
> Andrew
> -------------------------------------------
> There are no rules, only regulations. Luckily,
> history has shown that with time, hard work,
> and lots of love, anyone can be a technocrat.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
> > [mailto:owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com]On Behalf Of Gregory Lebovitz
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 3:59 AM
> > To: 'ipsec@lists.tislabs.com'
> > Subject: One base SOI ID? Humm
> > Importance: High
> >
> >
> > Barbara just said that if more of this community were
> > physically here at 54
> > in Yokohama, she would take a humm poll about whether to move
> > forward with
> > one SOI ID, one bail of hay.
> >
> > Here we go...
> >
> > "hum via email if you agree with the two ID authors coming
> > back to the list
> > with one ID for us to move forward discussing."
> >
> > Here's mine:    HMMMMM!!!
> >