- From: Jaye, Dan <DJaye@engagetech.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:17:24 -0500
- To: 'Dave Kristol' <dmk@bell-labs.com>
- Cc: "'http-state@lists.research.bell-labs.com'" <http-state@lists.research.bell-labs.com>, "'http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com'" <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Understandable confusion. Dave, The draft that I emailed out from the IETF meeting in Munich (v01) was bounced when submitted (because of the rule prohibiting submissions until after the meeting was concluded). I submitted the new draft (v02) last week. The ID administrator renumbered v02 to v01 so it would sequentially follow the previous (official) version. For simplicity, let's assume that the latest version is v01 and ignore the (unofficial) version I emailed to the list from Munich. Apologies for the confusion. -Dan -----Original Message----- From: Dave Kristol [SMTP:dmk@bell-labs.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 3:59 PM To: Jaye, Dan Cc: 'http-state@lists.research.bell-labs.com'; 'http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com' Subject: Re: New I-D for Http Jaye Trust State Mgt I'm confused. The draft that was announced via the IETF today was draft-ietf-http-jaye-trust-state-01.txt, but your email announced (and contains) draft-ietf-http-jaye-trust-state-02.txt. How are they related? Dave Kristol Daniel Jaye djaye@engagetech.com Chief Technology Officer v(508) 684-3641 Engage Technologies f(508) 684-3636 100 Brickstone Square, 1st Floor, Andover, MA 01810
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 1997 13:21:40 UTC