Re: New field proposed, UUID
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Mmkay... 9 Gb mirror pulse... that will work. (not)
>
> That's a seperate issue that does not pertain to the UUID's. Let's discuss
> this later.
Er, so far the only reason to have a UUID that has held up to scrutiny
revolves around whatever your signing plan is - if your signing plan is
going to fail because in requires a 9 gig mirror pulse then we don't
need UUIDs!
Post your scheme and we can evaluate it (and its required UUIDs) as a
package.
Jason
Reply to: