Re: Amsterdam Meeting

Guenter Roeck <roeck@conware.de> Thu, 08 July 1993 09:01 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00985; 8 Jul 93 5:01 EDT
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00981; 8 Jul 93 5:01 EDT
Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA10573; Thu, 8 Jul 93 04:36:37 -0400
X-Resent-To: chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU ; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 04:36:36 EDT
Errors-To: owner-chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from relay.conware.de by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA10565; Thu, 8 Jul 93 04:36:27 -0400
Received: from slc_2.conware.de by relay.conware.de with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0oDr1v-000Ci3C; Thu, 8 Jul 93 10:08 MET DST
Received: by slc_2.conware.de (/\==/\ Smail3.1.25.1 #25.8) id <m0oDr2l-000021C@slc_2.conware.de>; Thu, 8 Jul 93 10:09 MET DST
Message-Id: <m0oDr2l-000021C@slc_2.conware.de>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Guenter Roeck <roeck@conware.de>
Subject: Re: Amsterdam Meeting
To: {3COM/PDD/PeteW}@pdd.3mail.3com.com
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 93 10:09:26 MET DST
Cc: chassismib@cs.utk.edu
In-Reply-To: <930708.001614@3Mail.3Com.COM>; from "{3COM/PDD/PeteW}@pdd.3mail.3com.com" at Jul 8, 93 8:12 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> 
> Any reason why we can't have an informal meeting to discuss what, if 
> anything, to present as a standard? We all thought there was going to be a 
> meeting anyway.
> 
I would suggest to do the same thing. Unfortunately, I will be
in holiday next week.

I checked all the drafts (00..02) in the meantime. For me, draft 00
fits best to our needs, and I think it is the simplest and best to
implement. 

Guenter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guenter Roeck  -  Conware GmbH                  Phone: (0049) 721-9495-0
  Internet: roeck@conware.de                    Fax:   (0049) 721-9495-146
--------------------------------------------------------------------------