I think we should relook at John's "Proposal for message header" dated march 9

["Rik Drummond" <drummond@onramp.net>]

we had lots of discussion on david burtett's message header specification
during the meeting. I have two problems with the current draft: 1) it does
not document well the  "due diligence" path on researching the others
systems and how the headers we would use are derived from those. 2) it is
not clear how these proposed headers are derived from the research john did.
I suggest we take a quick relook at john's doumnets of march 9 on the header
proposal and see if we can incorporate them in to the david's version. I
don't think after looking at john's documents again that it will invalidate
our discussion during the meeting. However if we choose to used the research
on the headers john did it will be a much stronger document showing that we
did not "reinvent the wheel".

To this end, in next week's conference call I would like to discuss in
detail the following items: 1) prototype - 20 minutes - Nick, 2) Message
strucuture - 20 Minutes - dick and nick, 3) John's message header document -
20 minutes - John, 4) david's message header document - 20 minutes - David.
The other ten minutes are for start and finishing comments from the team
leader.

Best regards, rik




////////////////////////
Rik Drummond           /
CEO Drummond Group     /
v: 817.294.7339        /
f: 817.294.7950         /
www.drummondgroup.com  /
////////////////////////