Subject: RE: [Rserpool] Re: draft-ietf-rserpool-comp-00.txt

From: Erik Guttman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:28:17 +0200 (MEST)

John,

> I would suggest that now we are trying to fit SLP into the requirements.

My intent is to assess whether SLP fits the requirements not to fit
SLP into the requirements (subtle but important distinction).  That's
what you meant, I think, but I wanted to make it clear.

> I think that is OK, but would require a submission along the lines of
> "Using SLP for RSerPool Name Service" and then we could address
> the comparison better in this document.

Is there general interest in the working group in accepting this as
a work item?  I am eager to collaborate with others on this, provided
there's support for investigating alternatives.

Erik

_______________________________________________
rserpool mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rserpool

---

From: Qiaobing Xie <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:57:10 -0500

Erik Guttman wrote:
....
> there's support for investigating alternatives.

From my past experience, the working group will have to read the draft
first before it can decide whether to make the draft into a work item.

-Qiaobing