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

Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds

To: <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:45:46 -0700
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20040730080346.0275a778@fedex.cisco.com> <41211E0A.6040104@cisco.com> <p06020421bd471e1e8f78@[192.168.2.2]>

Hi -

> From: "Margaret Wasserman" <margaret@thingmagic.com>
> To: "Eliot Lear" <lear@cisco.com>
> Cc: <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 7:34 PM
> Subject: Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
...
> Do you think we have to expand NETCONF?  Or that we can get away with
> claiming that NETCONF _is_ the fully-expanded name of the protocol?
...

I think it would be better to expand it.

Randy



--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
  - From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>

References:
- Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
  - From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>
- Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
  - From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
- Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
  - From: Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
Next by Date: Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
Previous by thread: Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
Next by thread: Re: Comments on Application Mapping I-Ds
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread