Subject: RE: iRIP and CAP

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:39:19 -0400

Have you had an opportunity to read John Stracke's most recent post.  Do 
you think it makes you feel more comfortable with us not resubmitting 
iRIP.  John's document makes it more of an informational document.  This 
way we are not tasked with trying to keep up with mulitple drafts - i.e. 
when changes are made, we must get all editors to complete the changes, 
etc.  I am not saying we don't want to have multiple drafts because of 
work efforts - I'm saying it would be better not to duplicate 
text/functionality that may well live in a document that has "evolved" 
past the original set of text.
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

---

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:27:38 -0400

[email-masked] wrote:

> Have you had an opportunity to read John Stracke's most recent post.  Do you think it makes you feel more comfortable with us not resubmitting iRIP.  John's document makes it more of an informational document.

I wouldn't really consider it an Informational; it'd probably have to be standards track, because it specifies a way to interoperate.  But it would be a fairly small delta over the CAP RFC.

--
/=================================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.   |
|Chief Scientist |================================================|
|eCal Corp.      |I'm on a Mission From God to Save The World from|
[email-masked]|megalomania!                                    |
\=================================================================/