Re: arrrgh

[Vijay Saraswat <vj@research.att.com>]

While I have everything swapped in....

   Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:35:15 -0500 (EST)
   X-UIDL: 880558834.001
   From: Erik Ostrom <eostrom@research.att.com>

   much as i hate to delay the spec finalization another two months, i
   think these should be cleared up.  if there are any objections to the
   following proposals, please speak now.  (and hey dave, if there aren't
   any objections in like two days let's go ahead.)

     1. change the cord package to mcp-cord and make appropriate
	changes in message names, examples, etc.  this is a simpler
	fix than setting up a naming authority.

Right, it should be called mcp-cord.

     2. change the mcp message's arguments to (for example)
	  #$#mcp version: 1.0 to: 2.3
	jay proposed this before and it looks like it's already been
	adopted by one nearly-compliant implementation.  more
	importantly, it's probably the right thing.  although i think
	"to" is a bit too cute and would prefer "max-version", i'd rather
	finish than fight.

I am with Erik on this. Rather finish than fight :-).

Best,

Vijay