Interim IP registration proposal

From: jwarnica@ns.sympatico.ca (Jeff Warnica)
To: "Mark Rushton" <Mark@chebucto.ns.ca>, <ccn-ip@chebucto.ns.ca>
Cc: <ccn-editors@chebucto.ns.ca>, <ccn-tech@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:09:15 -0300
Importance: Normal
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <ccn-ip-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects

First; in general decisions should be made with the following procedure:
1. collect information
2. make decision

your paragraph number 2 and 4 suggest that this has been done backwards.
(this is the way its going to be. Is this possible?)

That being said. Is it possible? A definitive maybe.

However, this discussion has been centered around keeping or getting rid of
the IPDB. And this is neither the question we should be asking, nor the
paths we should be taking.

The IPDB camp has repeaditly asked/demanded for the use of the IPDB, but
never for specific features. Personally I only have a limited understanding
of (the features attached to) the IPDB, and how it differs from the
(features of the) NAMEDB.

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects