IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Seamoby] Paging Protocol Decision Description

"Pat R. Calhoun" <pcalhoun@bstormnetworks.com> Thu, 17 January 2002 22:31 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14660 for <seamoby-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:31:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA27432; Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:17:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA27401 for <seamoby@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:17:38 -0500 (EST)
Received: from EXCHSRV.stormventures.com ([65.107.25.226]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14511 for <seamoby@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:17:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: by EXCHSRV.stormventures.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <CWXKCGVB>; Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:17:05 -0800
Message-ID: <DC6C13921CCAFB49BCB8461164A3F4E38D235C@EXCHSRV.stormventures.com>
From: "Pat R. Calhoun" <pcalhoun@bstormnetworks.com>
To: 'Cedric Westphal' <cedric@IPRG.nokia.com>
Cc: 'Behcet Sarikaya' <behcet.sarikaya@alcatel.com>, seamoby@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Seamoby] Paging Protocol Decision Description
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:16:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19FA4.AA3AFCD0"
Sender: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: seamoby-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Context Transfer, Handoff Candidate Discovery, and Dormant Mode Host Alerting <seamoby.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: seamoby@ietf.org

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>>>  Can you point to one debate where the rough consensus was
>>> reached 
>>>  by way of more than 250 favorable opinions?
>>Hmmm.. Perhaps you misread my statement. Read above.
>
>I did push your statement to the extreme. The point was consensus
>does not go by absolute numbers, but relative numbers of for and
>against, especially since on any topic, the very vast majority never
>says a thing. 

Correct - and I am still waiting for others to express their view

PatC

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPEdNUzN1fXKoxmisEQIAOACgul1IIl8/PG0D+OhE3IcorwY2AxgAn1RA
Fpop9qOZyA6XX6ZkdwkJovtK
=2/ws
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status