From nobody Wed Jul 2 05:28:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738A11A0091 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 05:27:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6tnBbU7DVBrM for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 05:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F6A51A008D for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 05:27:55 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79da6d000004ad3-f5-53b3fac9131c Received: from ESESSHC021.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id C2.F7.19155.9CAF3B35; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 14:27:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [131.160.36.11] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 14:27:52 +0200 Message-ID: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:27:52 +0300 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje7JX5uDDRoalCxad2xislg6aQGr Rc/Wv2wWU/tsHVg8liz5yeQxeeMsFo9v1zeyeny5/JktgCWKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK6Prwx3G gvvsFTMuLGdqYJzP1sXIySEhYCIxtesklC0mceHeeiCbi0NI4CijxLuP/9ghnFWMErMObGDq YuTg4BXQlliy3g6kgUVARWLPyh5mEJtNwEJiy637LCC2qECUxJ1L/awgNq+AoMTJmU/A4iIC 4hIN3e/A6pkFmhkl5hwpALGFBcwl3i48zgYyXgKopqcxCKJET2LK1RZGCFteYvvbOWCtQkAX LH/WwjKBUWAWkg2zkLTMQtKygJF5FaNocWpxUm66kbFealFmcnFxfp5eXmrJJkZg6B7c8lt1 B+PlN46HGAU4GJV4eBW+bwoWYk0sK67MPcQozcGiJM678Ny8YCGB9MSS1OzU1ILUovii0pzU 4kOMTBycUg2M7L9bbz1/ldn9aG53Q2buB5Ppup9ZFzUqqWX8E2Bv/L9luUJixfeIltieCew/ Hd/a8V/PypaVea3LnDn/x/zCFjazzZufLWNbIpB+djlHUkJZyZR1q3rEXX2ywp983+3RoLbk 5IfJRRzrnqeVNmzg41f+UTvl5YvJSoK8sQwRv4UV2uZdCapUYinOSDTUYi4qTgQAW9aogz4C AAA= Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/WenqUa7N7eMEmDorAb9rzfhwpm8 Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org, Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 12:27:57 -0000 Folks, the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP WG and received positive feedback. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been published, we can progress this draft. We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two communities, as part of the shepherding process we are getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP communities. If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please share them. Thanks, Gonzalo From nobody Wed Jul 2 08:29:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B2501A034D for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:29:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0vJsBPF2U0bU for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:29:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoemail1.alcatel.com (hoemail1.alcatel.com [192.160.6.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E91431A02E5 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-122.lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by hoemail1.alcatel.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s62FTY18014422 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:29:36 -0500 (CDT) Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s62FTWE2011671 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:29:33 +0200 Received: from FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.7.71]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:29:32 +0200 From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" To: Gonzalo Camarillo , "dispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload Thread-Index: AQHPlfEWaqb9uTAbEkG4fNGz8z9YsZuM5wIw Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:29:31 +0000 Message-ID: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.41] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/_bBdFOGbqAUPCXV0GB7nzL1-7oo Cc: "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 15:29:45 -0000 Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves to become an informatio= nal document, or does it remain standards track. Keith=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf=20 > Of Gonzalo Camarillo > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 > To: dispatch@ietf.org > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos=20 > Jesus Bernardos Cano > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload >=20 > Folks, >=20 > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has=20 > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In=20 > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP=20 > WG and received positive feedback. >=20 > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ >=20 > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally=20 > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been=20 > published, we can progress this draft. >=20 > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at=20 > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP=20 > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor=20 > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus)=20 > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two=20 > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are=20 > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP=20 > communities. >=20 > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please=20 > share them. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Gonzalo >=20 > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > = From nobody Wed Jul 2 08:31:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D7511B294D for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:31:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d0SrRbeuK4OY for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:31:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oa0-f43.google.com (mail-oa0-f43.google.com [209.85.219.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41F311B2954 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:31:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id o6so12557774oag.16 for ; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:31:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=dSo86kStTKeTzxZl2GyZ0KBLrTjUjvwd4t1TbxZwVAE=; b=goc+yEntXXgARg8WgPJru1QZIdvw5yR6AwiTF9lhZWlnqy7qXPgJdF042iJKizmqT8 2+Fzil1P4scPCaStxyZ8ssmHd4Sj4hrfPGd5mbuDbyz6zfXwK304yVot651tJQ7irYS4 atuDjHuWmmDmjjYS8cpaIDAflkAc7cEFDG1oK+/gLvJxHvUmJ0H7B1HMAzX03zZiNiOc smCBrAVLVz433oVD4HM801kUY2ij/xsakHlI2TimHxPdMT2rRzlWaq7ESKZzKrLJ79zf oJGKGAsrOLNSO7knNkg5Jfn/jvxwLo7ibqiNAkOyO7oJ21Zxw48ghAmaoAMJ3ZSL8Weg CCYg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmGI0qoW2MZgD+ODNxbOQzF4g2+zS3iT8o98Zrj4HZ+KlYDPSlVmPbdk/VksjqhS6aBKY8l MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.132.171 with SMTP id ov11mr57982031oeb.46.1404315109828; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.143.131 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:31:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 11:31:49 -0400 Message-ID: From: Richard Barnes To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b4724f846b43204fd379728 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/vJyfm8oaeBjrrRgD-l0wFuhoUbc Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano , "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 15:31:53 -0000 --047d7b4724f846b43204fd379728 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, since it defines protocol. But if you have concerns, I'm open. On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) < keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: > Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves to become an > informational document, or does it remain standards track. > > Keith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > > Of Gonzalo Camarillo > > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 > > To: dispatch@ietf.org > > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos > > Jesus Bernardos Cano > > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > > > > Folks, > > > > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has > > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In > > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP > > WG and received positive feedback. > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ > > > > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally > > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been > > published, we can progress this draft. > > > > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at > > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP > > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor > > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) > > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two > > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are > > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP > > communities. > > > > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please > > share them. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Gonzalo > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dispatch mailing list > > dispatch@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > --047d7b4724f846b43204fd379728 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, sinc= e it defines protocol. =C2=A0But if you have concerns, I'm open.
<= div class=3D"gmail_extra">

On Wed, Jul 2,= 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <keith.drage@alcatel-= lucent.com> wrote:
Is the intention with AD sponsoring that thi= s moves to become an informational document, or does it remain standards tr= ack.

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dispatch [mailto:di= spatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Gonzalo Camarillo
> Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28
> To: dispatch@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos
> Jesus Bernardos Cano
> Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload
>
> Folks,
>
> the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has
> been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In
> particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP
> WG and received positive feedback.
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2p= sip-coap-reload/
>
> As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally
> planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been
> published, we can progress this draft.
>
> We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at
> this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP
> WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor
> this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus)
> acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two
> communities, as part of the shepherding process we are
> getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP
> communities.
>
> If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please
> share them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gonzalo
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>
_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

--047d7b4724f846b43204fd379728-- From nobody Wed Jul 2 10:27:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B8771B29A8; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:27:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RuVjjg-OyLMU; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 531C81B291D; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-173-57-89-168.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.57.89.168]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s62HRRfo062957 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Jul 2014 12:27:27 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host pool-173-57-89-168.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.57.89.168] claimed to be unnumerable.local Message-ID: <53B440FF.9080106@nostrum.com> Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 12:27:27 -0500 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rai@ietf.org References: <532B2896.6090502@nostrum.com> <535EAAA0.6000509@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <535EAAA0.6000509@nostrum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/zfkd1olJVjXxl5n8deTPDDd7htw Cc: dispatch@ietf.org Subject: [dispatch] Reminder : Details for SIPit 31 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 17:27:30 -0000 Please note again that the hotel block rates require reservation before the end of this month. If you plan to attend the event, but haven't registered, please do so soon. Thanks, RjS On 4/28/14, 2:23 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > > On 3/20/14, 12:42 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: >> SIPit 31 will be held in Nice, France Sep 28 - Oct 3, 2014. >> The event will be hosted by ETSI. >> >> More information, and the registration page, is available at >> >> Please take advantage of the opportunity to register early. > Please note the new information about the hotel block at the link > above (you may have to expand the section titled "Nice, France" > to see it). In particular, the hotel block rate guarantee requires > reservation before 31 July, 2014. > > >> >> In addition to the normal team-to-team testing at the event, >> we will be concentrating on several specific interoperability areas: >> * Nat and Firewall Traversal using Outbound, TURN, and STUN >> * RTCWeb >> * Advanced Video scenarios >> * Use of TLS and DTLS >> >> If you're planning to attend and have other areas you would like >> have a multi-team focus session around, please let me know. >> >> RjS >> >> _______________________________________________ >> RAI mailing list >> RAI@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rai > From nobody Wed Jul 2 23:01:12 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B7D91A00F5 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 23:01:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vVLbAZFsaQ78 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 23:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 579451A0A9F for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 23:01:06 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79da6d000004ad3-f6-53b4f1a093ac Received: from ESESSHC012.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 4B.69.19155.0A1F4B35; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 08:01:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [131.160.126.120] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 08:01:03 +0200 Message-ID: <53B4F19F.4040201@ericsson.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 09:01:03 +0300 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Barnes , "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrHLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje6Cj1uCDbYsl7Bo3bGJyWLppAWs Fj1b/7JZPG08y2gxtc/WgdWj9dleVo8lS34yeUzeOIvF49v1jaweXy5/ZgtgjeKySUnNySxL LdK3S+DKuHV4O1tBv0TFhWWT2BoY5wl1MXJySAiYSHTsW80GYYtJXLi3Hsjm4hASOMoosXR2 MyOEs4ZR4vjEY0wgVbwC2hIrV65i7mJk52ARUJH4HwkSZROwkNhy6z4LiC0qECVx51I/K0S1 oMTJmU/A4iJA8W/fzzKBjGQGmb/z9w92kISwgJvEnmutLBC79gMltnwF6+YUCJTY3/0Y6AgO oOvEJXoag0DCzAKaEq3bf7ND2PIS29/OYQaxhYBOW/6shWUCo9AsJLtnIWmZhaRlASPzKkbR 4tTipNx0I2O91KLM5OLi/Dy9vNSSTYzACDi45bfqDsbLbxwPMQpwMCrx8C7w2BIsxJpYVlyZ e4hRmoNFSZx34bl5wUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmpxYcYmTg4pRoYXbjmt/nVrWZof7ZEJyV7 0q6FJj7mTH5Tpn7VVJjxa1GszCqdeaKb+SI1bj4xe1jCuFKTW0ZF8xuz6ozpXh/PVVRmHH61 706y/oPwND3D51snPFgo8pxfs/D2Erk+Uxm55sNhNQ4B3668b16cXfFcz/S0oevbZj/5xo9x SRnfg02dhdZO0TJSYinOSDTUYi4qTgQAn2GEQGECAAA= Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/DQMpy1MFuLVGt9I1n4WMuhV8j9U Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano , "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 06:01:11 -0000 Hi Keith, yes, as Richard indicated below, it will be a PS. This is so because of the IANA policy defined by RELOAD for Kind-IDs. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6940#section-14.6 kind-IDs are registered using Standards Action. That is, "Values are assigned only for Standards Track RFCs approved by the IESG)". Since the draft registers two new Kind-IDs (Sections 11.2 and 11.3), it needs to be progressed as a PS. Cheers, Gonzalo On 02/07/2014 6:31 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: > My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, since it defines > protocol. But if you have concerns, I'm open. > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > > > wrote: > > Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves to become an > informational document, or does it remain standards track. > > Keith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org > ] On Behalf > > Of Gonzalo Camarillo > > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 > > To: dispatch@ietf.org > > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org > ; Carlos > > Jesus Bernardos Cano > > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > > > > Folks, > > > > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has > > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In > > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP > > WG and received positive feedback. > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ > > > > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally > > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been > > published, we can progress this draft. > > > > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at > > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP > > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor > > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) > > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two > > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are > > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP > > communities. > > > > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please > > share them. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Gonzalo > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dispatch mailing list > > dispatch@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > From nobody Thu Jul 3 03:00:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86F501A0368 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 03:00:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XDcRbOCsHAti for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 03:00:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoemail2.alcatel.com (hoemail2.alcatel.com [192.160.6.149]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D23A1A0196 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 03:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-42.lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by hoemail2.alcatel.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s63A0BnD001081 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 05:00:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s639xwri018008 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 12:00:03 +0200 Received: from FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.7.71]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 12:00:02 +0200 From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" To: Gonzalo Camarillo , Richard Barnes Thread-Topic: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload Thread-Index: AQHPlgq9aqb9uTAbEkG4fNGz8z9YsZuNurqAgABP4SA= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 10:00:01 +0000 Message-ID: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC326@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <53B4F19F.4040201@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <53B4F19F.4040201@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.38] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/qeRq1riHmxBHwgn9L50j0OdkeFc Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano , "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 10:00:20 -0000 The reason for my question in the first place is that the mail did not say = what track would be used. While there is no requirement for it to be so, do= cuments for AD sponsporing are frequently informational, and in some cases = have been downgraded to informational at this point. What I would have expected is some discussion in Richard's mail as to why i= t was appropriate that it could be AD sponsored rather than handled by a WG= . I would have expected to hear statements like it does not introduce any n= ew significant technical steps that will require discussion at WG level to = ensure the correct technical solution exists. I find the statement that it has to be AD sponsored because we want to get = rid of the working group does not really fulfil that need. Rather I would h= ave said, if it needs WG discussion, then you have to solve it. So does it need to be a WG document, or is AD sponsored sufficient? Keith=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com]=20 > Sent: 03 July 2014 07:01 > To: Richard Barnes; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > Cc: dispatch@ietf.org;=20 > draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus=20 > Bernardos Cano > Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload >=20 > Hi Keith, >=20 > yes, as Richard indicated below, it will be a PS. This is so=20 > because of the IANA policy defined by RELOAD for Kind-IDs. >=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6940#section-14.6 >=20 > kind-IDs are registered using Standards Action. That is,=20 > "Values are assigned only for Standards Track RFCs approved=20 > by the IESG)". >=20 > Since the draft registers two new Kind-IDs (Sections 11.2 and=20 > 11.3), it needs to be progressed as a PS. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Gonzalo >=20 >=20 > On 02/07/2014 6:31 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: > > My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, since=20 > it defines=20 > > protocol. But if you have concerns, I'm open. > >=20 > >=20 > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)=20 > > > > > > wrote: > >=20 > > Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves to become an > > informational document, or does it remain standards track. > >=20 > > Keith > >=20 > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org > > ] On Behalf > > > Of Gonzalo Camarillo > > > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 > > > To: dispatch@ietf.org > > > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org > > ; Carlos > > > Jesus Bernardos Cano > > > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring=20 > draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has > > > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In > > > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP > > > WG and received positive feedback. > > > > > >=20 > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ > > > > > > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally > > > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been > > > published, we can progress this draft. > > > > > > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at > > > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP > > > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor > > > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) > > > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two > > > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are > > > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP > > > communities. > > > > > > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please > > > share them. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Gonzalo > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > dispatch mailing list > > > dispatch@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dispatch mailing list > > dispatch@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > >=20 > >=20 >=20 > = From nobody Thu Jul 3 04:17:54 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C3661B2883 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:17:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c-7o0DbiyIa8 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sessmg22.ericsson.net (sessmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.58]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B67571B28A5 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:17:47 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3a-f799e6d000005085-9e-53b53bd9296c Received: from ESESSHC012.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sessmg22.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 31.5B.20613.9DB35B35; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 13:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [131.160.126.120] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 13:17:44 +0200 Message-ID: <53B53BD8.9090406@ericsson.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 14:17:44 +0300 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" , Richard Barnes References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <53B4F19F.4040201@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC326@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC326@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje5N663BBmenaVm07tjEZLF00gJW i56tf9ksnjaeZbSY2mfrwOrR+mwvq8eSJT+ZPCZvnMXi8e36RlaPL5c/swWwRnHZpKTmZJal FunbJXBl7O47zVhw3bDi+rINLA2MrepdjJwcEgImEl+nz2KCsMUkLtxbz9bFyMUhJHCUUWL5 32esIAkhgTWMEls3SoLYvALaEpNurWIBsVkEVCRu7T3LBmKzCVhIbLl1HywuKhAlcedSPytE vaDEyZlPwOIiQPH7yyewgyxgBlmw8/cPdpCEsICbxJ5rrSwQm9cxSTyfMwnsJE6BaImXm+YA TeIAOk9coqcxCCTMLKAnMeVqCyOELS+x/e0cZohDtSWWP2thmcAoNAvJ7llIWmYhaVnAyLyK UbQ4tbg4N93ISC+1KDO5uDg/Ty8vtWQTIzAGDm75bbWD8eBzx0OMAhyMSjy8Czy2BAuxJpYV V+YeYpTmYFES5114bl6wkEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYmDk6pBsb1rbuPmNn+EIhrWanw JU46K78jfPtmhvXRYbtOt1tuS2+xl1h9Yfem8/OPz2aIFPz/cNe8bY/jKrgWcp1uvn5NjnVJ s/LJBL/X+TLiUkbzDhy2EZOeqvlVPOHF1xMuvd9idvROmPhlSUKLm/0uFbkW0bb/npqtBe9M /4Qmm4kVN70oKLX6sVyJpTgj0VCLuag4EQCQ65XmYgIAAA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/XNqYTPPyxEdoyg8YRQ1rxqgMA0Y Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano , "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 11:17:52 -0000 Hi Keith, often times protocols survive the WG that specified them. In such cases, some time before closing the WG down a process for specifying further extensions to the protocol is defined. In this case, RELOAD will likely survive the P2PSIP WG. So, we need a process to handle RELOAD extensions after P2PSIP finishes its current WG items. Depending on factors such as the expected number of extensions, whether reviewers will be easy to find, etc., AD sponsoring some extensions can be a perfectly appropriate approach. There are other potential options as well, such as keeping the WG alive, creating mini-WGs for each new extension, etc. I do not want to speak for the current RAI ADs, but my understanding is that they have indeed considered all those options. When it comes to this particular draft, it has already been presented and discussed in the P2PSIP WG. Additionally, it has also been discussed within the CoAP community. That is, the technical work in the draft includes input from both relevant communities. Additionally, as I mentioned in my first email, we are going to get a dedicated reviewer from each community so that they check the draft one more time. Lastly, responding to your last question, the formal requirement for this extension is that it needs to be a PS. So, an AD sponsored spec is enough... and given that we have already gotten technical input from the P2PSIP community, processing it within the WG as opposed to outside of it does not provide any clear benefit at this point AFAICT. Having said that, I do not really care much about the actual process we follow here. I am flexible in that respect. Cheers, Gonzalo On 03/07/2014 1:00 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote: > The reason for my question in the first place is that the mail did not say what track would be used. While there is no requirement for it to be so, documents for AD sponsporing are frequently informational, and in some cases have been downgraded to informational at this point. > > What I would have expected is some discussion in Richard's mail as to why it was appropriate that it could be AD sponsored rather than handled by a WG. I would have expected to hear statements like it does not introduce any new significant technical steps that will require discussion at WG level to ensure the correct technical solution exists. > > I find the statement that it has to be AD sponsored because we want to get rid of the working group does not really fulfil that need. Rather I would have said, if it needs WG discussion, then you have to solve it. > > So does it need to be a WG document, or is AD sponsored sufficient? > > Keith > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com] >> Sent: 03 July 2014 07:01 >> To: Richard Barnes; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) >> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus >> Bernardos Cano >> Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload >> >> Hi Keith, >> >> yes, as Richard indicated below, it will be a PS. This is so >> because of the IANA policy defined by RELOAD for Kind-IDs. >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6940#section-14.6 >> >> kind-IDs are registered using Standards Action. That is, >> "Values are assigned only for Standards Track RFCs approved >> by the IESG)". >> >> Since the draft registers two new Kind-IDs (Sections 11.2 and >> 11.3), it needs to be progressed as a PS. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> >> On 02/07/2014 6:31 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: >>> My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, since >> it defines >>> protocol. But if you have concerns, I'm open. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) >>> >> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves to become an >>> informational document, or does it remain standards track. >>> >>> Keith >>> >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org >>> ] On Behalf >>> > Of Gonzalo Camarillo >>> > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 >>> > To: dispatch@ietf.org >>> > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org >>> ; Carlos >>> > Jesus Bernardos Cano >>> > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload >>> > >>> > Folks, >>> > >>> > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has >>> > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In >>> > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP >>> > WG and received positive feedback. >>> > >>> > >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ >>> > >>> > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally >>> > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been >>> > published, we can progress this draft. >>> > >>> > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at >>> > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to the P2PSIP >>> > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor >>> > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) >>> > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two >>> > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are >>> > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD and the CoAP >>> > communities. >>> > >>> > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please >>> > share them. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > >>> > Gonzalo >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > dispatch mailing list >>> > dispatch@ietf.org >>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dispatch mailing list >>> dispatch@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch >>> >>> >> From nobody Thu Jul 3 04:23:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E16AC1B2899 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:23:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Up8FtbFvDm6q for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoemail2.alcatel.com (hoemail2.alcatel.com [192.160.6.149]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA391B28A4 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:22:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-42.lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by hoemail2.alcatel.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s63BMogN025669 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 06:22:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.112]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s63BMnDc027941 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 13:22:49 +0200 Received: from FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.7.71]) by FR711WXCHHUB02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.112]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 13:22:49 +0200 From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" To: Gonzalo Camarillo , Richard Barnes Thread-Topic: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload Thread-Index: AQHPlgq9aqb9uTAbEkG4fNGz8z9YsZuONOqRgAAAxwA= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 11:22:48 +0000 Message-ID: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC48C@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <53B4F19F.4040201@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC326@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <53B53BD8.9090406@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <53B53BD8.9090406@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.38] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/apCyKksLm95U4nYxMEEinijhEv4 Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano , "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 11:23:02 -0000 Thanks, that is fine. I just think Richard should have said some of this in his original mail. Keith=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com]=20 > Sent: 03 July 2014 12:18 > To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Richard Barnes > Cc: dispatch@ietf.org;=20 > draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus=20 > Bernardos Cano > Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload >=20 > Hi Keith, >=20 > often times protocols survive the WG that specified them. In=20 > such cases, some time before closing the WG down a process=20 > for specifying further extensions to the protocol is defined. >=20 > In this case, RELOAD will likely survive the P2PSIP WG. So,=20 > we need a process to handle RELOAD extensions after P2PSIP=20 > finishes its current WG items. Depending on factors such as=20 > the expected number of extensions, whether reviewers will be=20 > easy to find, etc., AD sponsoring some extensions can be a=20 > perfectly appropriate approach. There are other potential=20 > options as well, such as keeping the WG alive, creating=20 > mini-WGs for each new extension, etc. I do not want to speak=20 > for the current RAI ADs, but my understanding is that they=20 > have indeed considered all those options. >=20 > When it comes to this particular draft, it has already been=20 > presented and discussed in the P2PSIP WG. Additionally, it=20 > has also been discussed within the CoAP community. That is,=20 > the technical work in the draft includes input from both=20 > relevant communities. Additionally, as I mentioned in my=20 > first email, we are going to get a dedicated reviewer from=20 > each community so that they check the draft one more time. >=20 > Lastly, responding to your last question, the formal=20 > requirement for this extension is that it needs to be a PS.=20 > So, an AD sponsored spec is enough... and given that we have=20 > already gotten technical input from the P2PSIP community,=20 > processing it within the WG as opposed to outside of it does=20 > not provide any clear benefit at this point AFAICT. >=20 > Having said that, I do not really care much about the actual=20 > process we follow here. I am flexible in that respect. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Gonzalo >=20 >=20 > On 03/07/2014 1:00 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote: > > The reason for my question in the first place is that the=20 > mail did not say what track would be used. While there is no=20 > requirement for it to be so, documents for AD sponsporing are=20 > frequently informational, and in some cases have been=20 > downgraded to informational at this point. > >=20 > > What I would have expected is some discussion in Richard's=20 > mail as to why it was appropriate that it could be AD=20 > sponsored rather than handled by a WG. I would have expected=20 > to hear statements like it does not introduce any new=20 > significant technical steps that will require discussion at=20 > WG level to ensure the correct technical solution exists. > >=20 > > I find the statement that it has to be AD sponsored because=20 > we want to get rid of the working group does not really=20 > fulfil that need. Rather I would have said, if it needs WG=20 > discussion, then you have to solve it. > >=20 > > So does it need to be a WG document, or is AD sponsored sufficient? > >=20 > > Keith > >=20 > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: 03 July 2014 07:01 > >> To: Richard Barnes; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > >> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; > >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus=20 > >> Bernardos Cano > >> Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring=20 > >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > >> > >> Hi Keith, > >> > >> yes, as Richard indicated below, it will be a PS. This is=20 > so because=20 > >> of the IANA policy defined by RELOAD for Kind-IDs. > >> > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6940#section-14.6 > >> > >> kind-IDs are registered using Standards Action. That is,=20 > "Values are=20 > >> assigned only for Standards Track RFCs approved by the IESG)". > >> > >> Since the draft registers two new Kind-IDs (Sections 11.2=20 > and 11.3),=20 > >> it needs to be progressed as a PS. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Gonzalo > >> > >> > >> On 02/07/2014 6:31 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: > >>> My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, since > >> it defines > >>> protocol. But if you have concerns, I'm open. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)=20 > >>> >>> > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves=20 > to become an > >>> informational document, or does it remain standards track. > >>> > >>> Keith > >>> > >>> > -----Original Message----- > >>> > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org > >>> ] On Behalf > >>> > Of Gonzalo Camarillo > >>> > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 > >>> > To: dispatch@ietf.org > >>> > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org > >>> =20 > ; Carlos > >>> > Jesus Bernardos Cano > >>> > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring > >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > >>> > > >>> > Folks, > >>> > > >>> > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has > >>> > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In > >>> > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP > >>> > WG and received positive feedback. > >>> > > >>> > > >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ > >>> > > >>> > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally > >>> > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been > >>> > published, we can progress this draft. > >>> > > >>> > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at > >>> > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to=20 > the P2PSIP > >>> > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor > >>> > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) > >>> > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two > >>> > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are > >>> > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD=20 > and the CoAP > >>> > communities. > >>> > > >>> > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please > >>> > share them. > >>> > > >>> > Thanks, > >>> > > >>> > Gonzalo > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > dispatch mailing list > >>> > dispatch@ietf.org > >>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> dispatch mailing list > >>> dispatch@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > >>> > >>> > >> >=20 > = From nobody Thu Jul 3 05:53:43 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A267F1B2937 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 05:53:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PyWGDW8wVAqH for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 05:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com (mail-ob0-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6048C1B27B7 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 05:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f176.google.com with SMTP id wm4so199482obc.35 for ; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=tIv6hDv9jpEu7rr9qk8/ik3Z7NRkjuQs0elTabgnhLs=; b=T739sg2tpVhAs3xMACInMXE8KqVod2YDx707rpoXwRrfVJb3aIff/RSOqt2c3vCtms p2hsJWdQBWPPBVC+CNalkZFPLI1DGP1B4KVfPcRvjohO08SK5C1uR7+3bnpCva6QA4ob W5cidabssTh7zc299sEKbs9nr6I7q9xniPt6z/NcK6caKMFkxPAT2Em/Y7GkPQZVbq33 9jonvbPNT5yN99sHrh4uY9TQzmNUaAv/TwA1PxkdpsC9n4xv3zPk8gMQN0mWHj/wJ5RV vsSzN9IOgN04Vvn0sjhHsaYmKlP2aXsqKLCLHRpn9lePZIng5oDc6OSwfjnoq//vfrQ2 lIew== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkxyKMK9IAObskBuSsQ49o0QA7Qq/rgSmC3RaWlTTQ2oXk2XPAE/1Z28ZbT0PWgTBcqMCvt MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.250.196 with SMTP id ze4mr4548275obc.46.1404392012768; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.143.131 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC48C@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <53B3FAC8.5080000@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FB91D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <53B4F19F.4040201@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC326@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <53B53BD8.9090406@ericsson.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B1FC48C@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 08:53:32 -0400 Message-ID: From: Richard Barnes To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1dcb80bfb0904fd497ff2 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/kc5f62QsVsGLIIlVfCjQ1NepDcs Cc: "dispatch@ietf.org" , Carlos Jesus Bernardos Cano , "draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 12:53:36 -0000 --001a11c1dcb80bfb0904fd497ff2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sorry for the brevity in my earlier email. Gonzalo's mail captures my thoughts well. --Richard On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 7:22 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) < keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: > Thanks, that is fine. > > I just think Richard should have said some of this in his original mail. > > Keith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com] > > Sent: 03 July 2014 12:18 > > To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Richard Barnes > > Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; > > draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus > > Bernardos Cano > > Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > > > > Hi Keith, > > > > often times protocols survive the WG that specified them. In > > such cases, some time before closing the WG down a process > > for specifying further extensions to the protocol is defined. > > > > In this case, RELOAD will likely survive the P2PSIP WG. So, > > we need a process to handle RELOAD extensions after P2PSIP > > finishes its current WG items. Depending on factors such as > > the expected number of extensions, whether reviewers will be > > easy to find, etc., AD sponsoring some extensions can be a > > perfectly appropriate approach. There are other potential > > options as well, such as keeping the WG alive, creating > > mini-WGs for each new extension, etc. I do not want to speak > > for the current RAI ADs, but my understanding is that they > > have indeed considered all those options. > > > > When it comes to this particular draft, it has already been > > presented and discussed in the P2PSIP WG. Additionally, it > > has also been discussed within the CoAP community. That is, > > the technical work in the draft includes input from both > > relevant communities. Additionally, as I mentioned in my > > first email, we are going to get a dedicated reviewer from > > each community so that they check the draft one more time. > > > > Lastly, responding to your last question, the formal > > requirement for this extension is that it needs to be a PS. > > So, an AD sponsored spec is enough... and given that we have > > already gotten technical input from the P2PSIP community, > > processing it within the WG as opposed to outside of it does > > not provide any clear benefit at this point AFAICT. > > > > Having said that, I do not really care much about the actual > > process we follow here. I am flexible in that respect. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Gonzalo > > > > > > On 03/07/2014 1:00 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote: > > > The reason for my question in the first place is that the > > mail did not say what track would be used. While there is no > > requirement for it to be so, documents for AD sponsporing are > > frequently informational, and in some cases have been > > downgraded to informational at this point. > > > > > > What I would have expected is some discussion in Richard's > > mail as to why it was appropriate that it could be AD > > sponsored rather than handled by a WG. I would have expected > > to hear statements like it does not introduce any new > > significant technical steps that will require discussion at > > WG level to ensure the correct technical solution exists. > > > > > > I find the statement that it has to be AD sponsored because > > we want to get rid of the working group does not really > > fulfil that need. Rather I would have said, if it needs WG > > discussion, then you have to solve it. > > > > > > So does it need to be a WG document, or is AD sponsored sufficient? > > > > > > Keith > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com] > > >> Sent: 03 July 2014 07:01 > > >> To: Richard Barnes; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > > >> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; > > >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus > > >> Bernardos Cano > > >> Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring > > >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > > >> > > >> Hi Keith, > > >> > > >> yes, as Richard indicated below, it will be a PS. This is > > so because > > >> of the IANA policy defined by RELOAD for Kind-IDs. > > >> > > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6940#section-14.6 > > >> > > >> kind-IDs are registered using Standards Action. That is, > > "Values are > > >> assigned only for Standards Track RFCs approved by the IESG)". > > >> > > >> Since the draft registers two new Kind-IDs (Sections 11.2 > > and 11.3), > > >> it needs to be progressed as a PS. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> > > >> Gonzalo > > >> > > >> > > >> On 02/07/2014 6:31 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: > > >>> My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, since > > >> it defines > > >>> protocol. But if you have concerns, I'm open. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Is the intention with AD sponsoring that this moves > > to become an > > >>> informational document, or does it remain standards track. > > >>> > > >>> Keith > > >>> > > >>> > -----Original Message----- > > >>> > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org > > >>> ] On Behalf > > >>> > Of Gonzalo Camarillo > > >>> > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28 > > >>> > To: dispatch@ietf.org > > >>> > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org > > >>> > > ; Carlos > > >>> > Jesus Bernardos Cano > > >>> > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring > > >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload > > >>> > > > >>> > Folks, > > >>> > > > >>> > the draft below, which relates to both P2PSIP and IoT, has > > >>> > been discussed in both the RELOAD and CoAP communities. In > > >>> > particular, it was presented at the Paris IETF in the P2PSIP > > >>> > WG and received positive feedback. > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload/ > > >>> > > > >>> > As you know, RELOAD took a little more time than originally > > >>> > planned to get published as an RFC. Now that RELOAD has been > > >>> > published, we can progress this draft. > > >>> > > > >>> > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and P2PSIP chairs and at > > >>> > this point the plan is not to add more WG items to > > the P2PSIP > > >>> > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richard) will AD sponsor > > >>> > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chairs (Carlos Jesus) > > >>> > acting as its shepherd. Given that the draft spans two > > >>> > communities, as part of the shepherding process we are > > >>> > getting dedicated reviewers from both the RELOAD > > and the CoAP > > >>> > communities. > > >>> > > > >>> > If somebody here in DISPATCH has additional comments, please > > >>> > share them. > > >>> > > > >>> > Thanks, > > >>> > > > >>> > Gonzalo > > >>> > > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > > >>> > dispatch mailing list > > >>> > dispatch@ietf.org > > >>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > >>> > > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> dispatch mailing list > > >>> dispatch@ietf.org > > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > --001a11c1dcb80bfb0904fd497ff2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry for the brevity in my earlier email. =C2=A0Gonzalo&#= 39;s mail captures my thoughts well. =C2=A0
--Richard


On Thu, Jul 3, 2014= at 7:22 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent= .com> wrote:
Thanks, that is fine.

I just think Richard should have said some of this in his original mail.

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com]
> Sent: 03 July 2014 12:18=
> To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Richard Barnes
> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org;
> dra= ft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus
> Bernardos Cano
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload=
>
> Hi Keith,
>
> often times protocols survive the WG that specified them. In
> such cases, some time before closing the WG down a process
> for specifying further extensions to the protocol is defined.
>
> In this case, RELOAD will likely survive the P2PSIP WG. So,
> we need a process to handle RELOAD extensions after P2PSIP
> finishes its current WG items. Depending on factors such as
> the expected number of extensions, whether reviewers will be
> easy to find, etc., AD sponsoring some extensions can be a
> perfectly appropriate approach. There are other potential
> options as well, such as keeping the WG alive, creating
> mini-WGs for each new extension, etc. I do not want to speak
> for the current RAI ADs, but my understanding is that they
> have indeed considered all those options.
>
> When it comes to this particular draft, it has already been
> presented and discussed in the P2PSIP WG. Additionally, it
> has also been discussed within the CoAP community. That is,
> the technical work in the draft includes input from both
> relevant communities. Additionally, as I mentioned in my
> first email, we are going to get a dedicated reviewer from
> each community so that they check the draft one more time.
>
> Lastly, responding to your last question, the formal
> requirement for this extension is that it needs to be a PS.
> So, an AD sponsored spec is enough... and given that we have
> already gotten technical input from the P2PSIP community,
> processing it within the WG as opposed to outside of it does
> not provide any clear benefit at this point AFAICT.
>
> Having said that, I do not really care much about the actual
> process we follow here. I am flexible in that respect.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On 03/07/2014 1:00 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> > The reason for my question in the first place is that the
> mail did not say what track would be used. While there is no
> requirement for it to be so, documents for AD sponsporing are
> frequently informational, and in some cases have been
> downgraded to informational at this point.
> >
> > What I would have expected is some discussion in Richard's > mail as to why it was appropriate that it could be AD
> sponsored rather than handled by a WG. I would have expected
> to hear statements like it does not introduce any new
> significant technical steps that will require discussion at
> WG level to ensure the correct technical solution exists.
> >
> > I find the statement that it has to be AD sponsored because
> we want to get rid of the working group does not really
> fulfil that need. Rather I would have said, if it needs WG
> discussion, then you have to solve it.
> >
> > So does it need to be a WG document, or is AD sponsored sufficien= t?
> >
> > Keith
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com]
> >> Sent: 03 July 2014 07:01
> >> To: Richard Barnes; DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> >> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org;
> >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org; Carlos Jesus
> >> Bernardos Cano
> >> Subject: Re: [dispatch] AD sponsoring
> >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload
> >>
> >> Hi Keith,
> >>
> >> yes, as Richard indicated below, it will be a PS. This is
> so because
> >> of the IANA policy defined by RELOAD for Kind-IDs.
> >>
> >> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6940#section-1= 4.6
> >>
> >> kind-IDs are registered using Standards Action. That is,
> "Values are
> >> assigned only for Standards Track RFCs approved by the IESG)&= quot;.
> >>
> >> Since the draft registers two new Kind-IDs (Sections 11.2
> and 11.3),
> >> it needs to be progressed as a PS.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Gonzalo
> >>
> >>
> >> On 02/07/2014 6:31 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:
> >>> My initial inclination is to keep it Standards Track, sin= ce
> >> it defines
> >>> protocol. =C2=A0But if you have concerns, I'm open. > >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> >>> <kei= th.drage@alcatel-lucent.com
> >>> <mailto:keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Is the intention with AD sponsoring that th= is moves
> to become an
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 informational document, or does it remain s= tandards track.
> >>>
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Keith
> >>>
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > -----Original Message-----
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Of Gonzalo Camarillo
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Sent: 02 July 2014 13:28
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > To: dispatch@ietf.org <mailto:di= spatch@ietf.org>
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Cc: draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.iet= f.org
> >>>
> <mailto:draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload@tools.ietf.org>; Carlos
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Jesus Bernardos Cano
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Subject: [dispatch] AD sponsoring
> >> draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Folks,
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > the draft below, which relates to both= P2PSIP and IoT, has
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > been discussed in both the RELOAD and = CoAP communities. In
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > particular, it was presented at the Pa= ris IETF in the P2PSIP
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > WG and received positive feedback.
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ji= menez-p2psip-coap-reload/
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > As you know, RELOAD took a little more= time than originally
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > planned to get published as an RFC. No= w that RELOAD has been
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > published, we can progress this draft.=
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > We have discussed with the RAI ADs and= P2PSIP chairs and at
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > this point the plan is not to add more= WG items to
> the P2PSIP
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > WG. Instead, one of the RAI ADs (Richa= rd) will AD sponsor
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > this draft with one of the P2PSIP chai= rs (Carlos Jesus)
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > acting as its shepherd. Given that the= draft spans two
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > communities, as part of the shepherdin= g process we are
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > getting dedicated reviewers from both = the RELOAD
> and the CoAP
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > communities.
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > If somebody here in DISPATCH has addit= ional comments, please
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > share them.
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Thanks,
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > Gonzalo
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > ______________________________________= _________
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > dispatch mailing list
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > d= ispatch@ietf.org <mailto:dispat= ch@ietf.org>
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinf= o/dispatch
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 >
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ___________________________________________= ____
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 dispatch mailing list
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 dispat= ch@ietf.org <mailto:dispatch@ie= tf.org>
> >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dis= patch
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

--001a11c1dcb80bfb0904fd497ff2-- From nobody Wed Jul 9 01:30:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F0611A0062 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 01:30:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.694 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.694 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=1.506] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xgv0JmaEuN2k for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 01:30:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sessmg23.ericsson.net (sessmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D1551A0324 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 01:30:31 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-f798a6d000000e9b-f5-53bcfda54fec Received: from ESESSHC001.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sessmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 21.42.03739.5ADFCB35; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 10:30:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSMB203.ericsson.se ([169.254.3.189]) by ESESSHC001.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.21]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 10:30:28 +0200 From: Atle Monrad To: "Atarius, Roozbeh" , "dispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: MEID URN Thread-Index: Ac+Jlu8FjStcWJ84QX6af3JG7fXmEgRt8jvA Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 08:30:27 +0000 Message-ID: <7D2F7D7ADBA812449F25F4A69922881C168645A3@ESESSMB203.ericsson.se> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: nb-NO, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.148] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7D2F7D7ADBA812449F25F4A69922881C168645A3ESESSMB203erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrOLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje7Sv3uCDZa/k7NYOmkBq8XeZ0UO TB5Llvxk8lg09RljAFMUl01Kak5mWWqRvl0CV8asDSdYCy6kV3x9PpelgfFIbBcjB4eEgIlE 91rzLkZOIFNM4sK99WxdjFwcQgJHGSVWXnvGAuEsZpTYdOU0O0gVm4COxLmfd1hBbBGBWInn 3RuZQGxhAVGJXRcnM0PExSRW7GphgrCNJLZ+nssIYrMIqEhMXtvNAmLzCvhK3G+6A1YjJBAk sWrqYrA4p0CwxNt7/1hAjmMUkJWY28QLEmYWEJe49WQ+E8ShAhJL9pxnhrBFJV4+/scKYStJ NC55wgpRny9x/ukXZohVghInZz5hmcAoMgvJqFlIymYhKYOI60gs2P2JDcLWlli28DUzjH3m wGMmZPEFjOyrGEWLU4uLc9ONjPVSizKTi4vz8/TyUks2MQJj6uCW37o7GFe/djzEKMDBqMTD u8BwT7AQa2JZcWXuIUZpDhYlcd5F5+YFCwmkJ5akZqemFqQWxReV5qQWH2Jk4uCUamCcdff7 DaPOo7Fmjk5uVvNWXmA5HX/V/D6r1Jre2Td930uZvHhyiaNMST114fpzsk/OFMwLP1q+vCTq w+I9si7cj812pFnWev0+ZrHkpk8c397CKtPciZM+ML7Z9fVAcI3UlF8qvvtdl8+ofxzrZ1vl kVCq7ebCWvTh7i3z0AA7Vt3JvRrfm52VWIozEg21mIuKEwF+BecbigIAAA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/yl90GbmRL7LP9K8wkjIhBph_LL4 Subject: Re: [dispatch] MEID URN X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 08:30:34 -0000 --_000_7D2F7D7ADBA812449F25F4A69922881C168645A3ESESSMB203erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All I'd like to support completion of draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-05 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn/ and draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanc= eid/ These drafts are the 3GPP2 variants of the work already done and documente= d by 3GPP & IETF in RFC 7254 (was draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn) and RFC 7255 (was draft-allen-dispatch-imei-urn-as-instanceid) As 3GPP also document certain aspects of work done in 3GPP2, the two drafts= above are dependencies for 3GPP as well as for 3GPP2 It is attempted to write the drafts for 3GPP2 according to the same logic a= s RFC 7254 & RFC 7255 to hopefully be able to complete these drafts soon. Thanks /atle ________________________________ Atle Monrad 3GPP CT Chairman Group Function Technology - Standardization and Technical Regulation Ericsson From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Atarius, Roo= zbeh Sent: 16. juni 2014 21:32 To: dispatch@ietf.org Subject: [dispatch] MEID URN Hello all, I have uploaded two drafts 1- draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-05 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn/ 2- draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanc= eid/ Please provide comments if any. Thanks Roozbeh Atarius --_000_7D2F7D7ADBA812449F25F4A69922881C168645A3ESESSMB203erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All

 

I’d like to support completion of

 

draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-05

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-di= spatch-meid-urn/  

and        <= /o:p>

draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid-00

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/dr= aft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid/    &nb= sp;        

 

These drafts are  the 3GPP2 variants of the wor= k already done and documented by 3GPP & IETF in

 

RFC 7254
(was draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn)

and

RFC 7255
(was draft-allen-dispatch-imei-urn-as-instanceid)

 

As 3GPP also docume= nt certain aspects of work done in 3GPP2, the two drafts above are dependen= cies for 3GPP as well as for 3GPP2

 

It is attempted to = write the drafts for 3GPP2 according to the same logic as RFC 7254 & RF= C 7255 to hopefully be able to complete these drafts soon.

 

Thanks

/atle

 

 

________________________________


Atle Monrad
3GPP CT Chairman

Group Function Technology – Standardization and Technical Regulation<= /span>
Ericsson

 

 

From: dispatch= [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Atarius, Roozbeh
Sent: 16. juni 2014 21:32
To: dispatch@ietf.org
Subject: [dispatch] MEID URN

 

Hello all,

 

I have uploaded two drafts

 

1-      draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-05

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ata= rius-dispatch-meid-urn/        =  

2-      draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid-00

https://datatracker.ietf.org= /doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid/   &n= bsp;         

 

Please provide comments if any.

 

Thanks

Roozbeh Atarius

 

--_000_7D2F7D7ADBA812449F25F4A69922881C168645A3ESESSMB203erics_-- From nobody Mon Jul 14 05:33:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD3751A03C8 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:33:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id psXOTGo0r5Ox for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:33:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wg0-x22a.google.com (mail-wg0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 313CF1A03BF for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:33:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id l18so3965780wgh.1 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:33:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=36dWlsJ8oxrIvEMog1A28fumr7PlervwH3q6r1aMFmM=; b=u/Ul/23L/Paufi6BETKgsku/DTm0Lq5+PuF/UMwGQhEp+5d1wb8fck+AiFA45gVf/O o9cxL+4SBYq2Jje7A03LeNKkzGirmxEYFD7PEirb64jNTnYQtmHaOVeuN1N0dyAUFqf+ CLQRk3PAVp2y/TkiUutCxcq2RoM+rbLxATYWLK2mQOTURzh6BnQDlpBo7lvWKtMU0U4b Xo5OAhJYR1uWanXw/99mCFA1T9gfAaNyZwrBR/edzEWU+xBdksYf6ZC2so0RUMOtj0Go rVb2DGZpbThOpqk7WJo+JA46594JQN14+z+p9Fg7sP9KhY8IBdBcEh8hD1pB/tg3I+zp ULMw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.237.135 with SMTP id vc7mr19619366wjc.86.1405341210401; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:33:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.217.116.201 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:33:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 07:33:30 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: DISPATCH Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01494148a25fe004fe267f3c Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/gKxzu_0XabUFjHx6MvIrn58thlw Subject: [dispatch] Proposal to AD sponsor meid-urn drafts X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 12:33:33 -0000 --089e01494148a25fe004fe267f3c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi all, The proposal for dispatching these two documents is for them to progress as AD sponsored since they are specific to 3GPP2: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid/ If anyone has concerns about the proposal, please post them on the mailing list no later than Monday, July 28th, 2014. Regards, Mary. --089e01494148a25fe004fe267f3c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

The proposal for dis= patching these two documents is for them to progress as AD sponsored since = they are specific to 3GPP2:

If anyone= has concerns about the proposal, please post them on the mailing list no l= ater than Monday, July 28th, 2014.=C2=A0


Regards,
Mary.=C2=A0
--089e01494148a25fe004fe267f3c-- From nobody Mon Jul 14 10:52:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971161B2798 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:52:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pWqer2Eua1X9 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:52:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968821B279A for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:52:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omta22.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.73]) by qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id SHn51o0021ap0As5AHsBVC; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:52:11 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([24.34.72.61]) by omta22.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id SHsA1o00Z1KKtkw3iHsA36; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:52:11 +0000 Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s6EHq9pR026647 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:52:09 -0400 Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s6EHq9ew026646; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:52:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:52:09 -0400 Message-Id: <201407141752.s6EHq9ew026646@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> From: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Sender: worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) To: dispatch@ietf.org In-reply-to: (mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com) References: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1405360331; bh=04m6ka1nXmv31Taw3l88g4ju6MWaslBfj6T6H4GASkI=; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Date:Message-Id:From:To: Subject; b=NGVHQZa0tcQhriUd/wd7Tby/OIP4knTT+AzHHgCdlSDbUYNCqv9hjmmC5sdu+6sGg 7C50IfCTguOfzbpbHA/Z6q1V7fyHjNwfpWkYeO/33XoW2WAoNBFmHLoDaXzLrVlaZy K76M4u/GJFyfNiFc/3FGifoxj0n4Z/yDZCsvTPK8vm3i3Enzi4jkyejEqitS0Jllmg f1x6ORHVosfudlUhgfCPP6NBKZ5qF8fVX4wDX8Cvx8MsAdpE30uOufQHg7NAtmbdqd W8Q2s2qfgYQGhPDK3qabzQ5F/dW1m0JvIM6LKl57erMjmJYodQGZR4ddH82o28pYMJ 5k6zIJ+QEX0RQ== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/l2E348XvEnDICTSQCDtvyzUFfj0 Subject: Re: [dispatch] Proposal to AD sponsor meid-urn drafts X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:52:15 -0000 > From: Mary Barnes > > The proposal for dispatching these two documents is for them to progress as > AD sponsored since they are specific to 3GPP2: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn/ > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-as-instanceid/ It sounds like a good idea to me. Dale From nobody Fri Jul 18 07:22:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956741A045B; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:22:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c44ftbHluFk2; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x231.google.com (mail-vc0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F4491B29A0; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id hy4so7321137vcb.8 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:22:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8/wH1YRl7Dory7te2FUTIryfwib3Re2gkn+X8JmHKbk=; b=j7KlUMQrDsC6n8+wnS/xLuxUJyEDs72TV196wpFVMEqBob/qrhHkoH5NyLxX/IQEoX zZt6xkCv+IyWAfQ4lGps+Wd4nzDpaHiMuxzXso7HDhvcHScFs3rkxkiP5761zLtK7SBI tQK2rARe5Qxax9zFAQL9xu8BhPRvMPlsYgJ8XRopU+aa9TPHfQzms4pUYttKYX/HoQKP Zu74nRtZsdem8glpIj4QDripDrPqOS3hJZLInqxbfeMjbJxE0atD86hB2X4oBzYpPALT mi1WlAv+egWA+eYPC6KxlrvvuL9TFXA2ZAcex0LkZWmHQrQtbpXS3RrNPyDxikrF9HZI V4qg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.42.135 with SMTP id ty7mr6469424vcb.14.1405693360114; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:22:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.170.8 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 07:22:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17E289C9@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> References: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17E289C9@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:22:40 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: DISPATCH Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133997464922504fe787d7a Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/s9gECjM5t_n1cBEC8F_PFVzRjnE Cc: SIPCORE , "ecrit@ietf.org Org" Subject: [dispatch] Fwd: [SIPForum-techwg] SIPconnect2.0 Kickoff and IETF90 Next Week. X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:22:46 -0000 --001a1133997464922504fe787d7a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =10This activity might be of interest to folks in the RAI area. A number o= f you all participated in SIP Connect 1.1 which resulted in new work coming into IETF. I'm cc'ing WGs for which I believe this is of particular interest, noting in particular that emergency services will be addressed. So, if you have comments on this email, please restrict those to a single, relevant mailing list or please contact Andrew directly. Note, that SIP Forum has no membership requirement in order to participate in activities - there is an individual "free" participant membership you can register for. Regards, Mary. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Hutton, Andrew Date: Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM Subject: [SIPForum-techwg] SIPconnect2.0 Kickoff and IETF90 Next Week. To: "techwg@sipforum.org" Hi All, Those of you that were at SIPNOC 2014 will know that the SIP Forum is about to start a SIPconnect2.0 activity. If you were not at SIPNOC then the presentation from this event can be found at: *http://www.sipforum.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_download/gid,= 700/Itemid,261/* . If you are the IETF meeting next week in Toronto then there is a chance to get in touch and discuss this and maybe you want to volunteer to provide some assistance to this activity. Regards Andy _______________________________________________ techwg mailing list Send mail to: techwg@sipforum.org Unsubscribe or edit options at: http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techw= g --001a1133997464922504fe787d7a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=10This activity might be of interest to folks in the RAI = area. =C2=A0A number of you all participated in SIP Connect 1.1 which resul= ted in new work coming into IETF. =C2=A0I'm cc'ing WGs for which I = believe this is of particular interest, noting in particular that emergency= services will be addressed. =C2=A0So, if you have comments on this email, = please restrict those to a single, relevant mailing list or please contact = Andrew directly.

Note, that SIP Forum has no membership requirement in order = to participate in activities -=C2=A0there is an individual "free"= participant membership you can register for.=C2=A0

Regards,
Mary.=C2=A0

---= ------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Hutton, Andrew <andrew.hutton@unify.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM
Subject: [SIPForum-techwg] SIPconnect= 2.0 Kickoff and IETF90 Next Week.
To: "techwg@sipforum.org" <techwg@sipforum.org>


Hi All,
=C2=A0
Those of you that were at SIPNOC 2014 will know that the SIP Forum is = about to start a SIPconnect2.0 activity.
=C2=A0
If you were not at SIPNOC then the presentation from this event can be= found at: http://www.sipforum.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_download/= gid,700/Itemid,261/.
=C2=A0
If you are the IETF meeting next week in Toronto then there is a chanc= e to get in touch and discuss this and maybe you want to volunteer to provi= de some assistance to this activity.
=C2=A0
Regards
Andy
=C2=A0
=C2=A0

_______________________________________________
techwg mailing list
Send mail to: techwg@sipforum.org
Unsubscribe or edit options at: =C2=A0http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/t= echwg


--001a1133997464922504fe787d7a-- From nobody Tue Jul 22 21:38:27 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B811B2788; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:38:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IHt9I1QX5hSw; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x229.google.com (mail-qg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D3CE1A0302; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id q107so783194qgd.0 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:38:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=RJgueyKYKpaGjgpJGmchkuKydbE0v2Hx+LAMOs5Dqgs=; b=WU5SU2a6YFVb9r8nEmvrKOSfXuyB2TVYsRhulfOkD54EySAq8vi6r4/ZDALkPaTmJk G83uuwhJZlMGOPao+ongUO4xqpHfHDQxw/GImpiuZz4mqdrgCji0AOq6K+oy/5wFhTBT fx6eF2K/T0tvel5EUXH5BRewmcqFASQtBHI+E91848yBppF3ja/gszg7l4tDf/95N8Nq am1CkeBeFPSc8ZWA7HyQATBWAfev2KPqj4fLbbicY5RppjFRPurZdi6aYu1G31J2AQR8 y+nPMoZ67y8t8ghPRagzSIj5ZCQgX6qzegFwyEphAcTQsmNtR3+oMdewi8imdr6CRcfQ t7Vg== X-Received: by 10.224.131.71 with SMTP id w7mr50176027qas.91.1406090300167; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.52.44] ([206.47.221.210]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g4sm2109791qay.6.2014.07.22.21.38.17 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:38:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53CF3C38.2070706@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 00:38:16 -0400 From: Spencer Dawkins User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: DISPATCH References: <9F33F40F6F2CD847824537F3C4E37DDF17E289C9@MCHP04MSX.global-ad.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040901020602010107010209" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/1IsZRTue8fGjAQpAPbUlc0yuQrM Cc: SIPCORE , "ecrit@ietf.org Org" Subject: Re: [dispatch] Fwd: [SIPForum-techwg] SIPconnect2.0 Kickoff and IETF90 Next Week. X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 04:38:23 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040901020602010107010209 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 07/18/2014 10:22 AM, Mary Barnes wrote: > This activity might be of interest to folks in the RAI area. A > number of you all participated in SIP Connect 1.1 which resulted in > new work coming into IETF. I'm cc'ing WGs for which I believe this is > of particular interest, noting in particular that emergency services > will be addressed. So, if you have comments on this email, please > restrict those to a single, relevant mailing list or please contact > Andrew directly. I'm just following up on Mary's note - we're beginning the process of scheduling a kickoff call for SIPconnect 2.0, and the details about that process are at http://sipforum.org/pipermail/techwg/2014-July/004510.html. The SIP Forum proposed charter for this work is at ttp://www.sipforum.org/content/view/179/213/ This will be my last note on these mailing lists announcing SIPconnect 2.0. If you have questions or comments, please contact me or Andy Hutton. Best wishes to you all. Spencer Dawkins, wearing his SIP Forum Technical Director bandana > > Note, that SIP Forum has no membership requirement in order to > participate in activities - there is an individual "free" participant > membership you can register for. > > Regards, > Mary. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Hutton, Andrew* > > Date: Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM > Subject: [SIPForum-techwg] SIPconnect2.0 Kickoff and IETF90 Next Week. > To: "techwg@sipforum.org " > > > > > Hi All, > Those of you that were at SIPNOC 2014 will know that the SIP Forum is > about to start a SIPconnect2.0 activity. > If you were not at SIPNOC then the presentation from this event can be > found at: > _http://www.sipforum.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_download/gid,700/Itemid,261/_. > If you are the IETF meeting next week in Toronto then there is a > chance to get in touch and discuss this and maybe you want to > volunteer to provide some assistance to this activity. > Regards > Andy > > _______________________________________________ > techwg mailing list > Send mail to: techwg@sipforum.org > Unsubscribe or edit options at: > http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch --------------040901020602010107010209 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 07/18/2014 10:22 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
This activity might be of interest to folks in the RAI area.  A number of you all participated in SIP Connect 1.1 which resulted in new work coming into IETF.  I'm cc'ing WGs for which I believe this is of particular interest, noting in particular that emergency services will be addressed.  So, if you have comments on this email, please restrict those to a single, relevant mailing list or please contact Andrew directly.

I'm just following up on Mary's note - we're beginning the process of scheduling a kickoff call for SIPconnect 2.0, and the details about that process are at http://sipforum.org/pipermail/techwg/2014-July/004510.html.

The SIP Forum proposed charter for this work is at ttp://www.sipforum.org/content/view/179/213/

This will be my last note on these mailing lists announcing SIPconnect 2.0. If you have questions or comments, please contact me or Andy Hutton.

Best wishes to you all.

Spencer Dawkins, wearing his SIP Forum Technical Director bandana


Note, that SIP Forum has no membership requirement in order to participate in activities - there is an individual "free" participant membership you can register for. 

Regards,
Mary. 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Hutton, Andrew <andrew.hutton@unify.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM
Subject: [SIPForum-techwg] SIPconnect2.0 Kickoff and IETF90 Next Week.
To: "techwg@sipforum.org" <techwg@sipforum.org>


Hi All,
 
Those of you that were at SIPNOC 2014 will know that the SIP Forum is about to start a SIPconnect2.0 activity.
 
If you were not at SIPNOC then the presentation from this event can be found at: http://www.sipforum.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_download/gid,700/Itemid,261/.
 
If you are the IETF meeting next week in Toronto then there is a chance to get in touch and discuss this and maybe you want to volunteer to provide some assistance to this activity.
 
Regards
Andy
 
 

_______________________________________________
techwg mailing list
Send mail to: techwg@sipforum.org
Unsubscribe or edit options at:  http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg




_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

--------------040901020602010107010209--