Amsterdam BOF

Gary Scott Malkin <gmalkin@xylogics.com> Mon, 19 April 1993 20:15 UTC

Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Gary Scott Malkin <gmalkin@xylogics.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 16:15:46 -0400
Message-Id: <267.199304192015@atlas.xylogics.com>
To: stev@ftp.com
Cc: ietf-rip@xylogics.com, gvaudre@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
In-Reply-To: (stev knowles's message of Mon, 19 Apr 93 15:24:34 -0400 <9304191924.AA22099@ftp.com>
Subject: Amsterdam BOF

> i woudl imagine that a regular WG session would be called, rather than a
> BOF, since the WG existed, and you are checking on the progress of its
> output. 

That's a procedural question.  Personally, I never thought the WG should
have been dissolved until RIP-2 became a Standard.  I guess it all depends
on how easy it is to restart a WG (as opposed to creating a new one).  You
also have to consider that there will be only the one meeting, until it's
time to go from Draft Standard to Standard.  Greg, what say you?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Malkin                          Remember- take care of your feet,
(617) 272-8140                       and always have respect for cows.

Amsterdam BOF Gary Scott Malkin
Re: Amsterdam BOF Marshall Rose (via RadioMail)
Re: Amsterdam BOF stev knowles
Amsterdam BOF Gary Scott Malkin
Amsterdam BOF Gary Scott Malkin
Re: Amsterdam BOF Fred Baker
Re: Amsterdam BOF Greg Vaudreuil