Subject: RE: [midcom] Delete R48?

From: "Sanjoy Sen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:51:31 -0500

Melinda,

	Most of us agreed that we need to have two parts to describe a
pinhole - a "descriptor" and "actions". According to Paul's email, R48 can
be a placeholder for the "actions" part. If we're going to subsume both
these parts under pinhole definition (TBD), then R48 is redundant. 

Sanjoy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Melinda Shore [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:01 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [midcom] Delete R48?
> 
> 
> There's a proposal to delete R48 from Scott's bulleted
> list.  Any objections?
> 
> Melinda
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> midcom mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom
>