On Jun 19, 2012, at 19:23 , Ralph Castain wrote:
> What we have said is that we don't believe the FT "run thru failure" position pushed by UTK is particularly required at this time. Partly a question of impact vs benefit, mostly due to competing approaches offering equivalent fault recovery capability with less impact. But that's a separate discussion.
We are all looking forward to the moment when you will educate us with references to back your statements about the competing approaches with less impact. Of course a reasonable delay might be totally awesome.