[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Status of the WG

To: mikek@muonics.com
Subject: Re: Status of the WG
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 13:37:40 +0100
Cc: david.durham@intel.com, bwijnen@lucent.com, sming@ops.ietf.org, randy@psg.com
In-reply-to: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0302131145520.12095-100000@slepton.muonics.com>(message from Michael Kirkham on Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:34:17 -0800(PST))
References: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0302131145520.12095-100000@slepton.muonics.com>

>>>>> Michael Kirkham writes:

Michael> As a compiler vendor I have a vested interest in supporting
Michael> SMIng in whatever form it takes, but not settling the
Michael> ASN.1-like vs. New Grammar issue seems to me to be a little
Michael> detrimental to the SMIng effort.  More recent discussions
Michael> seemed to be based around the idea that SMIng would continue
Michael> to be ASN.1-like, which I think is unfortunate.

It would have been more helpful if people like you would have raised
their opinions rather than waiting for things to happen...

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder    <http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Status of the WG
  - From: Michael Kirkham <mikek@muonics.com>

References:
- RE: Status of the WG
  - From: Michael Kirkham <mikek@muonics.com>

Prev by Date: RE: Status of the WG
Next by Date: Re: Status of the WG
Previous by thread: Re: Status of the WG
Next by thread: Re: Status of the WG
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread