Re: Question re HIP dependency [Re: about Wedgelayer 3.5 / Fat IP approaches]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


(co-chair hat off)

On 2004-07-04, at 11.16, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> Some discussion on this thread refers to dependency on HIP.
>
> Question to the WG: given the current state of HIP, do we
> want to consider dependency on HIP as
>
> a) acceptable
> b) unacceptable?

I have always been under the impression that HIP is aiming for 
experimental. In that case, I think it would be in-appropriate to 
depend on HIP.

- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3

iQA/AwUBQOp1x6arNKXTPFCVEQKYgACgzud5A+raLfvY5TVUGSK9Ry6w9jYAoJqQ
q69P76ZZRHlff5/yJ1ANFNBk
=I3sW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----