Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id SAA25081; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:46:56 -0500
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.4); Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:46:30 -0500
Received: from koobera.math.uic.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id SAA25048; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 18:46:28 -0500
Received: (qmail-queue invoked by uid 666); 5 Mar 1996 23:48:19 GMT
Date: 5 Mar 1996 23:48:19 GMT
Message-ID: <19960305234819.10678.qmail@koobera.math.uic.edu>
From: djb@koobera.math.uic.edu (D. J. Bernstein)
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: re PIPELINING

> all of this talk about the merits of pipelining and/or parallel 
> delivery is very interesting, but is not within the charter of
> the DRUMS working group.

Then why is the ``efficiency feature'' paragraph in your spec?

It is technically inaccurate to call this an ``efficiency feature.''
It is poor engineering to say that it SHOULD be implemented. Are you
suggesting that I not point out these problems?

---Dan