Hi all
If we want Paul and Yaron to take this to our AD, we need to show that there
are more people who think these work items are a good idea. More people than
just me and MCR. So please show your support (or objections!) soon. An I
think this is a good idea, I think we should use ternary
Yes, I definitely think this is a good idea.
Thanks,
Steve
-Original Message-
From: ipsec-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Yoav Nir
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 4:45 AM
To: IPsecme WG
Cc: Paul Hoffman
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Large Scale VPN
Hi all
+1, Thanks, --David
-Original Message-
From: ipsec-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Stephen Hanna
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 10:19 AM
To: Yoav Nir; IPsecme WG
Cc: Paul Hoffman
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Large Scale VPN
Yes, I definitely think this is
+1 from me as well. The approach is a good idea, and the WG should proceed as
outlined.
Mark
On Dec 12, 2011, at 10:32 AM, david.bl...@emc.com
david.bl...@emc.com wrote:
+1, Thanks, --David
-Original Message-
From: ipsec-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
+1
thanks,
-suresh
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:50:06AM -0800, Mark Boltz wrote:
+1 from me as well. The approach is a good idea, and the WG should proceed as
outlined.
Mark
On Dec 12, 2011, at 10:32 AM, david.bl...@emc.com
david.bl...@emc.com wrote:
+1, Thanks, --David
As I indicated in the side meeting and mailing list discussions, I
definitely support this going forward.
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Yoav Nir
To: IPsecme WG
Cc: Paul Hoffman
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 1:44 AM
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Large Scale VPN
Hi all
If we want Paul and