Re: [cin] why not Nemo? //Aviation Networks

SM <sm@resistor.net> Fri, 31 August 2012 20:08 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: cin@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cin@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 840CE21F853F for <cin@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.491
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.491 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.108, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L5gRBu4l9A0S for <cin@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E925C21F84CF for <cin@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q7VK8iIn000714; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1346443736; bh=hfGBunN3P4APMwpiBiqEoVVqRa2a9S4F7rkbptOpyHk=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc; b=KSpFt+I8BRbdXJ8abno8mlNnjTIM1gQxDQja7k68tFVgXuGhcV8enL/3REZ1VQLxo biqet4cYVkpM701/DnhxiiML12m+FrW5fD+X/92fjc7nowU/iqPWulpDMRAKlQOYO+ GDL3t44OJu9p9B6AmdJU3IUs4z8AJN4CtJtkP0V8=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1346443736; i=@resistor.net; bh=hfGBunN3P4APMwpiBiqEoVVqRa2a9S4F7rkbptOpyHk=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc; b=Hcq63n8ZarvWsQ67lXhMgAzJ3LLEqO9sE+cbF51jwAW1ETFmvilWNjfPesS9zXqp6 5w0VYOr45yhsbv01bfkzcPT3mTiTejPvFXKi0RWvkuMojWGrP8/9iS42TrOisy9B9h v7K/7kLZKYyblEUmCs1oIaGHP7BcTKcnwBfTo9W8=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20120831130307.0994cb20@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:04:43 -0700
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, cin@ietf.org
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65D93EA26B2@XCH-NW-01V.nw.n os.boeing.com>
References: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F25C26@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65D936C9109@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F2635C@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65D93EA21A7@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F26A78@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65D93EA26B2@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [cin] why not Nemo? //Aviation Networks
X-BeenThere: cin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <cin.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cin>, <mailto:cin-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cin>
List-Post: <mailto:cin@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cin-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cin>, <mailto:cin-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 20:08:58 -0000

At 09:02 31-08-2012, Templin, Fred L wrote:
>I think the "multiple independent interoperable implementations"
>requirement doesn't come into play until Draft Standard. So, I

The Draft Standard status is no longer available (see BCP 9)

>believe it is OK for a document to go forward even as Proposed
>Standard without necessarily needing a backing implementation.

Yes.

Regards,
-sm