IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue

Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com> Fri, 28 August 2009 17:56 UTC

Return-Path: <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64ECD3A6963 for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.675
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.675 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.301, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2T7byFriBLft for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ew0-f207.google.com (mail-ew0-f207.google.com [209.85.219.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5641E3A6821 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:56:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ewy3 with SMTP id 3so637301ewy.42 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=AvJLV0ttCMfz2nHlcJptwP0V1Dlpg+axyOkLciijjJM=; b=QRzkGIddiqIgkVuWFQgLmaJ2VlHNEjstPJK6vSGdiZQT4pa//LSB+uKfuIALKnB+Db fc6tH9yeV4C202LW5ndBEKGC0ckdeJJJ2t7GrzhKgX3yy8vvpAr6MERStMwdUNuHkdo7 sKF1DQ0JJKYB/mtJ5PE7MLvAWiUY9ddyciemU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=dIdV/QcbRmuYxcfcAI+f7U5UHCaAIs/bezV/VeiXwGOn6vvCZ1WjebODlPpoZQ+ZV1 xhcBFCJQJ+Guqsvj9ogwwGuLgzCnDXnqsvX+ZG6tNeOi9Jusk0VYSnLwRg/5+uiz6Elp Q+DDjPdnx6waMasVDIPVxrVjqml/nnRfRdnas=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.211.154.16 with SMTP id g16mr1634945ebo.19.1251482171987; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:56:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <f72742de0908280848q62e21c54q2b2b2bc72b33f891@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3a880e2c0908211129l7d9defa5od81261e3e5805714@mail.gmail.com> <479011.65903.qm@web111210.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <f72742de0908270926o6991317cw8d140a7f371e7245@mail.gmail.com> <e0b04bba0908280416w60e9c7cdre7e3eaef3e244cb1@mail.gmail.com> <f72742de0908280848q62e21c54q2b2b2bc72b33f891@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 18:56:11 +0100
Message-ID: <e0b04bba0908281056q373b1dd4gf36a9e24cf3d8bfc@mail.gmail.com>
From: Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
To: ogpx@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502c8734dd5ed04723766d4
Subject: Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue
X-BeenThere: ogpx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual Worlds and the Open Grid Protocol <ogpx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ogpx>
List-Post: <mailto:ogpx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:56:10 -0000

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Joshua Bell <josh@lindenlab.com> wrote:

>
> Can list participants agree to VWRAP as "not perfect, but good enough" and
> move past the name issue to real interop work?
>

I vote +1 for this to move us ahead.

The group name doesn't matter too much, and even if a de facto name sticks,
it's still got the *Region/Agent* part to it which is very appropriate and
distinguishes it from other protocols.


Morgaine.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email