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

RE: [Syslog-sec] Required transport

To: David B Harrington <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: [Syslog-sec] Required transport
From: Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: syslog-sec@employees.org
Delivered-to: archive-syslog-sec@lists.adiscon.com
Delivered-to: syslog-sec@employees.org
In-reply-to: <20041029183606.C49995C79D@willers.employees.org>
List-archive: <http://www.employees.org/pipermail/syslog-sec>
List-help: <mailto:syslog-sec-request@www.employees.org?subject=help>
List-id: syslog-sec.www.employees.org
List-post: <mailto:syslog-sec@www.employees.org>
List-subscribe: <http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec>, <mailto:syslog-sec-request@www.employees.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec>, <mailto:syslog-sec-request@www.employees.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20041029183606.C49995C79D@willers.employees.org>
Sender: syslog-sec-bounces@www.employees.org

Hi,

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, David B Harrington wrote:

> Hi Anton,
>
> I think you'll find the IESG will expect the WG to select one
> transport as the interoperability baseline for the standard.

I'm certain so as well.

> I could of course be wrong, so I suggest the area directors be
> consulted to see what expectations they have on this issue.

I'll double check while at the IETF.

Thanks,
Chris

_______________________________________________
Syslog-sec mailing list
Syslog-sec@www.employees.org
http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec

References:
- RE: [Syslog-sec] Required transport
  - From: "David B Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net>

Prev by Date: RE: [Syslog-sec] Required transport
Next by Date: www.employees.org mailing list memberships reminder
Previous by thread: RE: [Syslog-sec] Required transport
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread