Subject: Re: [Ecrit] WG: ECRIT Interim Meeting

From: Andrew Newton <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 10:09:28 -0500

On Dec 30, 2005, at 2:12 PM, Tschofenig, Hannes wrote:
> 5) Architectural Aspects
> ------------------------
>
> Location-to-URL Mapping Architecture and Framework
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-mapping- 
> arch
> -00.txt

I'd like to see this discussed before items in #3 as it drastically  
affects the outcome of any technical proposal.

> Emergency Context Routing of Internet Technologies Architecture
> Considerations
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-newton-ecrit-arch- 
> conside
> rations-01.txt

Though I haven't discussed this with my co-author, I'm not sure we  
need to discuss this draft at the interim.  My understanding of the  
feedback from the last IETF meeting was that people found this  
valuable as a draft that attempts to explain how the parts are glued  
together but did not find the issues raised within it very valuable.   
Hence, it could stand some rewriting and the issues within it should  
really be dealt with in the other documents.

-andy

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 13:44:39 -0500

My intention is to update -mapping-arch- a bit to include the generic 
aspects as well (the ones that simply involve the role of mapping in the 
call flow for emergency calls, as discussed on the ecrit list). I hope 
that these are less controversial...

I agree that having an architecture discussion first would be helpful, 
as we seem to have somewhat different perspectives that tend to inform 
our mental protocol pictures.

Andrew Newton wrote:
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-mapping-arch
>> -00.txt
>