Re: Regrouping for IPSEC WORKING GROUP LAST CALL

ho@earth.hpc.org (Hilarie Orman) Mon, 23 February 1998 02:17 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id VAA09115 for ipsec-outgoing; Sun, 22 Feb 1998 21:17:35 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 21:28:35 -0500
From: ho@earth.hpc.org
Message-Id: <199802230228.VAA17540@earth.hpc.org>
To: tytso@MIT.EDU
Cc: plambert@certicom.com, ipsec@tis.com
In-reply-to: Yourmessage <199802210440.XAA04852@dcl.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Regrouping for IPSEC WORKING GROUP LAST CALL
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

> Should we remove the EC groups altogether and defer these issues to
> IPSECOND?

There's a scene in Music Man where everyone goes around singing
"trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble."  Meant to show a kind of small-town
attitude, as I remember.  Rabelais, Bal-zac.  EC.

The groups are optional.  The NEWGROUP mode has always been there
exactly for the purpose of accommodating the expected drift of
the opinio-of-the-art.  And there will never be a last call that
doesn't bring out controversy.

But no Y coordinate ... :-)  ref. obs.

Hilarie