Re: few comments on the prot-06 draft -- positiveInteger/seconds

["Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>]

same for me
Tom Petch

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Natale" <Bob.Natale@AppliedSNMP.com>
To: <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: few comments on the prot-06 draft -- positiveInteger/seconds


> Since overall WG feedback was sought:
> 
> I share Juergen's position on both questions -- positiveInteger and seconds.
> 
> BobN
> 
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 07:32:09 +0200
> >From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>  
> >Subject: Re: few comments on the prot-06 draft  
> >To: Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>
> >Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "Steven Berl (sberl)" 
> <sberl@cisco.com>, netconf <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
> >
> >On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 09:10:54AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> >> I do not think there is consensus to make any change at this time.
> >> 
> >> I wonder what the rest of the WG thinks?
> >
> >I think positiveInteger is what we should use and I like the idea
> >to allow for a resolution in seconds.
> >
> >/js
> >
> >Juergen Schoenwaelder     International University Bremen
> ><http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>     P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 


--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>