[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: moving along on rules language

To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: moving along on rules language
From: Marshall Rose <mrose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 09:44:49 -0700
Cc: OPES WG <ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openproxy/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-openproxy.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openproxy-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Organization: Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
References: <> <> <> <>
Sender: owner-ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxxxxxxx

> > great. if your confident with an alternative approach, put an
> > initial document together and submit it. i don't want to forestall
> > alternatives, but we need to be wrapping things up.
> 
> I hope to submit an alternative draft for WG review by Tuesday.

good.


> > (we also need that other document you were working on.)
> 
> It is in the IESG queue.

IESG queue? i don't think so. you meant to say that you sent it to the I-D
repository, right?

/mtr

Follow-Ups:
- Re: moving along on rules language
  - From: Alex Rousskov

References:
- moving along on rules language
  - From: Marshall Rose
- Re: moving along on rules language
  - From: Alex Rousskov
- Re: moving along on rules language
  - From: Marshall Rose
- Re: moving along on rules language
  - From: Alex Rousskov

Prev by Date: Re: [opes-end-comm]: What is traceable in an OPES Flow?
Next by Date: Re: Optional Notification?
Previous by thread: Re: moving along on rules language
Next by thread: Re: moving along on rules language
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread