Re: Question 1 about deadlock issue

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Ran and all,

  No I don't..

RJ Atkinson wrote:

> Does anyone here believe that the current confirmation text should be
> retained
> as-is ?
>
> Please speak up on-list if you believe in retaining the current
> confirmation
> process text as-is.  I'd be interested to understand the rationale for
> retaining it if anyone wants to retain it.
>
> Silence will be interpreted as agreement that the current text at issue
> either (1) should be edited in some manner xor (2) deleted entirely.
>
> My goal here is to try to validate that there is broad belief that the
> current text should not remain as-is in the final RFC, ignoring for
> the moment the question of what change the WG prefers to undertake.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ran
> rja@extremenetworks.com
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801