Re: Writing Assignments from the March 11 meeting

Ruth Lang <rlang@NISC.SRI.COM> Wed, 20 March 1991 18:49 UTC

Received: by merit.edu (5.65/1123-1.0) id AA08665; Wed, 20 Mar 91 13:49:21 -0500
Received: from ws28.nisc.sri.com by merit.edu (5.65/1123-1.0) id AA08661; Wed, 20 Mar 91 13:49:18 -0500
Received: by ws28.nisc.sri.com (5.64/SRI-NISC1.1) id AA00918; Wed, 20 Mar 91 10:49:02 -0800
Message-Id: <9103201849.AA00918@ws28.nisc.sri.com>
To: clw
Cc: disi
Subject: Re: Writing Assignments from the March 11 meeting
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1991 10:48:59 -0800
From: Ruth Lang <rlang@NISC.SRI.COM>

Date: Wed, 20 Mar 91 12:56:38 EST
From: Chris Weider <clw@merit.edu>

>    Do the authors of this paper want to contact everyone in the world who
> might be building implementations of the X.500 protocols, or do they just
> want to rely on organizations volunteering their implementation information
> after the authors make it clear that they are building such a document?

> I personally think it makes much more sense to rely on implementors voluntarily
> contacting the authors.  I think the extent of our fairness is to agree to
...

Chris,

I agree that the authors should not contact everyone in the world.  In
order to obtain voluntary responses, we need to exert a reasonable
amount of effort to construct a list of survey recipients, e.g., pilot
managers, mailing lists, etc.  If we are lucky, responses will come.

Ruth