Subject: [Iptel] comments and reviews on tel URI extensions solicited

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 02:51:34 -0500

Folks,

At this past IETF meeting, we discussed once again the fate of the 
three tel URI extensions under discussion within iptel:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-trunk-group-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mahy-iptel-cpc-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-yu-tel-url-07.txt

These drafts have received virtually no list discussions or comments. 
When no one steps up to spend time on documents, generate comments, 
and give input, it generally means that there is not really sufficient 
interest to continue moving forward with it. As a result, Cullen and I 
will remove these items from our consideration unless there is 
sufficient list discussion and comments on these drafts by 
mid-December to demonstrate real commitment to working on them.

As a result, I strongly encourage interested parties to post comments 
and issues immediately.

Thanks,
Jonathan R.
-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel

---

From: "Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 13:58:15 +0000

Hi Jonathon, folks,
  I agree with Richard; I *had* assumed that James' document was just 
waiting for the
interminable discussions on the tel URL to complete and for it to come 
out as an RFC
i.e. it's in limbo until 2806-bis comes out.

Did I miss someone objecting to yu-tel-url-07? - I can't find any 
complaint on the ML
archive.

atb,
   Lawrence

---

From: Stevan Leiden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:11:26 -0500

Can a draft-rfc go to WGLC if it's not a WG work item generated  
document (as I assume, since I don't see draft-ietf-iptel-tel-uri)?

shl

On Sunday, November 23, 2003, at 08:58 AM, Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP)  
wrote:

>> and give input, it generally means that there is not really  
>> sufficient interest to continue moving forward with it. As a result,  
>> Cullen and I will remove these items from our consideration unless  
>> there is sufficient list discussion and comments on these drafts by

---

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:50:01 -0500

At 08:58 AM 11/23/2003, Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP) wrote:

>interminable discussions on the tel URL to complete and for it to come out 
>as an RFC

Can we move this document to last call ASAP?

Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza  -   Sterling, VA  20166
sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org   ENUM +87810-13313-31331
PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683,  Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz>
<http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<