Message-ID: <49A46034.4080201@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:01:40 -0700
From: Lawson English <lenglish5@cox.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com>
References: <ebe4d1860902240640u4e24ac2an5d4a2686286eb40e@mail.gmail.com>	<49A40ADA.2080309@comlounge.net>	<E319BEE7-1DA2-4474-A5AC-8934842B2E54@lindenlab.com>
 <49A456D4.3060602@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49A456D4.3060602@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mmox@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mmox] xxSD working group?
Precedence: list
Reply-To: lenglish5@cox.net

Jon Watte wrote:
> Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity) wrote:
>> 3. the charter of this list is rather constrained... it is to attempt 
>> to standardize a protocol that is in wide use (for some definition of 
>> the term "wide".) it 
>
> I thought we all agreed that the charter was *not* to standardize any 
> particular protocol currently in use, because that's an explicit 
> technology bias.
> If that is actually the charter, then I know that a lot of people on 
> this list will have to withdraw.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> jw
>
Does the IETF make up new protocols from scratch, generally? Thought 
"working/implemented code" was part of the deal.


L