IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Three revised Internet Drafts

Paul-Andre Pays <Paul-Andre.Pays@inria.fr> Fri, 31 January 1992 16:40 UTC

Received: from nri.reston.va.us by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15599; 31 Jan 92 11:40 EST
Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15594; 31 Jan 92 11:40 EST
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <g.17831-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Fri, 31 Jan 1992 14:05:02 +0000
Original-Received: from nuri.inria.fr by concorde.inria.fr, Fri, 31 Jan 92 15:05:31 +0100
PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line
Original-Received: by nuri.inria.fr, Fri, 31 Jan 92 15:05:23 +0100
PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 15:05:23 +0100
From: Paul-Andre Pays <Paul-Andre.Pays@inria.fr>
Message-Id: <9201311405.AA18408@nuri.inria.fr>
To: Lenggenhager@gate.switch.ch, S.Kille@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Three revised Internet Drafts
Cc: "Christian.Huitema" <Christian.Huitema@sophia.inria.fr>, osi-ds <osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk>, Christian@cs.ucl.ac.uk, Huitema@cs.ucl.ac.uk, osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk

	
	Would anyone object to making ";" or "," alternate separators?   Then you
	can use whichever you like.
	
	Steve
	
Yes I would!

As for type keywords there is a "real" need, for one single
recommended value.

If the <DN: ....   is adopted then the ";" is required in my mind

-- PAP

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email