Re: How about moving this discussion ...?
Pete Grillo <pl0143@psilink.com> Tue, 09 February 1993 17:47 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05128;
9 Feb 93 12:47 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05124;
9 Feb 93 12:47 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12514;
9 Feb 93 12:47 EST
Received: from thumper.bellcore.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05119;
9 Feb 93 12:47 EST
Received: by thumper.bellcore.com (4.1/4.7)
id <AA09634> for ietf-archive@nri.reston.va.us; Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:46:19 EST
Received: from worldlink.worldlink.com (worldlink.com) by thumper.bellcore.com
(4.1/4.7)
id <AA09614> for /usr/lib/sendmail -oi -fowner-snmp2 X-snmp2;
Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:46:13 EST
Received: by worldlink.worldlink.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-Worldlink)
id AA07189; Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:46:05 -0500
Message-Id: <2938354943.4.pl0143@psilink.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 93 09:43:40 -0800
To: oldera@twg.com, rlstewart@eng.xyplex.com, snmp <snmp@psi.com>,
snmp2 <snmp2@thumper.bellcore.com>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Pete Grillo <pl0143@psilink.com>
Organization: Network Innovations
Subject: Re: How about moving this discussion ...?
X-Mailer: PSILink-DOS (3.3)
>OK, once again, how about us merging the two SNMP >mail groups? > >1) If the SNMPv2 work is "almost complete", then it >is SNMP, for discussion purposes at least; Good point >2) There is obvious confusion as to which mail >group to post to; Another good point >3) I am tired of double postings! An overwhemingly good (even bordering on great) point <Some stuff skipped> >Seriously, it just seems to make sense to me. >All in favor, say AYE! Flamethrowers not required;-) AYE! AYE! AYE! AYE! AYE! AYE! AYE! (oopss, I guess I only get one vote). Seriously, I am hard pressed to find a downside to this proposal. >Regards, > >Ed Alcoff > pete
- Re: How about moving this discussion ...? Ed Alcoff - Prod Mtg
- Re: How about moving this discussion ...? Pete Grillo