Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

[P1619-2] P1619.2 Status as of 2009-11-18

To: P1619-2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [P1619-2] P1619.2 Status as of 2009-11-18
From: Matt Ball <matt.ball@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:50:37 -0700
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=P1619-2>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20P1619-2>
List-owner: <mailto:P1619-2-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:P1619-2-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:P1619-2-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Reply-to: Matt Ball <matt.ball@xxxxxxxx>

Hi Folks,

I've attached the current status on P1619.2 ballot resolution from Fabio Maino.

--
Thanks!

Matt Ball, Chair, IEEE P1619 Security in Storage Working Group
Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
500 Eldorado Blvd, Bldg #5 BRM05-212, Broomfield, CO 80021
Work: 303-272-7580, Cell: 303-717-2717

Attachment: 1619,2 Status 2009-11-18-1.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Follow-Ups:
- [P1619-2] text addressing the technical comment
  - From: David McGrew

Prev by Date: [P1619-2] text addressing the technical comment
Next by Date: Re: [P1619-2] Question: Should we only allow one data unit size within a key scope?
Previous by thread: [P1619-2] Unsubscribe Information
Next by thread: [P1619-2] text addressing the technical comment
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread