Subject: Re: CAP Transport -- Issue Resolved? Renamed "Issues Document"

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 15:24:53 -0400

Alexander Taler wrote:

> It would be nice to have updates of open issues more often than CAP
> drafts will be posted.

It would also be nice to have the CAP drafts posted more often.  We went, what
was it, 6 months without seeing a draft from the subgroup, which made it hard
to tell what was really going on with CAP.

--
/=============================================================\
|John Stracke    | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK  |
[email-masked]|============================================|
|Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed |
|eCal Corp.      |  by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch |
\=============================================================/

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 20:52:43 GMT

John, just a quick comment.  There were lots of minutes posted regarding 
text that was going into the draft.  The actual draft work did not get 
really put together totally until right near when it was sent to the list. 
 So, there was no real "draft"  to be published.  Now that there is one, 
and it has been put on the IETF Announce list, that will change and you 
will see more work.  In fact, there has been quite a bit of activity on 
the Guide to Implementors and there should be a very rough draft on that 
coming on the list very soon, probably next week.  So (8-), be careful 
what you ask for...

John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
08/11/99 03:24 PM

        To:     [email-masked]
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: CAP Transport -- Issue Resolved? Renamed "Issues Document"

> It would be nice to have updates of open issues more often than CAP

It would also be nice to have the CAP drafts posted more often.  We went, 
what
was it, 6 months without seeing a draft from the subgroup, which made it 
hard
to tell what was really going on with CAP.