Re: ESP revisions straw poll
Dennis Glatting <dennis.glatting@plaintalk.bellevue.wa.us> Tue, 20 May 1997 00:21 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa11005; 19 May 97 20:21 EDT
Received: from portal.ex.tis.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13358;
19 May 97 20:20 EDT
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id
UAA24065 for ipsec-outgoing; Mon, 19 May 1997 20:06:54 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199705200013.RAA03011@imo.plaintalk.bellevue.wa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain
MIME-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3 v118.2)
From: Dennis Glatting <dennis.glatting@plaintalk.bellevue.wa.us>
Date: Mon, 19 May 97 17:13:17 -0700
To: perry@piermont.com
Subject: Re: ESP revisions straw poll
cc: Hilarie Orman <ho@earth.hpc.org>, ipsec@tis.com
Reply-To: dennis.glatting@plaintalk.bellevue.wa.us
References: <199705192210.SAA21465@jekyll.piermont.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
> Now, I realize that it might not be pleasant for the losers, but > we have *all* been on the losing side of one argument or another > in this process, and we just have to accept that we've lost and > live with it and move on. > I thought the purpose here is collaboration. Why do we have to have winners and losers? -dpg
- Re: ESP revisions straw poll Hilarie Orman
- Re: ESP revisions straw poll Dennis Glatting
- Re: ESP revisions straw poll Stephen Kent
- Re: ESP revisions straw poll Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: ESP revisions straw poll Stephen Kent