Re: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt

[Peter Nixon <listuser@peternixon.net>]

On Mon 27 Aug 2007, you wrote:
> [gwz] ...
>
> (b) "Is the level of affirmative response sufficient for this draft to
> become a WG work item?"
> [gwz]
> [gwz] Discounting the recent explosion of people (seldom, if ever, heard
> from before) pushing radsec, I suspect that there aren't many more than 4
> people active on this list (even including authors & chairs ;-).

There are many of us who also lurk on the list and prefer to leave the 
arguing up to others :-)

I think this draft should be accepted as a WG item.

FWIW I also think that RADSEC should be  a WG item also but I am aware that 
some people are vehemently against that for reasons that are less 
apparent...

Regards
-- 

Peter Nixon
http://peternixon.net/

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