From vkg@bell-labs.com Tue Jun 5 06:26:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 436CC21F8665 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 06:26:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fZz6Z+7AZPdd for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 06:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C1B21F86AF for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 06:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usnavsmail2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.10]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id q55DQfOO002757 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:26:41 -0500 (CDT) Received: from umail.lucent.com (umail-ce2.ndc.lucent.com [135.3.40.63]) by usnavsmail2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id q55DQe5S007143 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:26:41 -0500 Received: from shoonya.ih.lucent.com ([135.222.138.246]) by umail.lucent.com (8.13.8/TPES) with ESMTP id q55DQeQh009753 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:26:40 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <4FCE0A5F.50102@bell-labs.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 08:32:15 -0500 From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" Organization: Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cuss@ietf.org References: <4FCE07D1.8030102@neclab.eu> In-Reply-To: <4FCE07D1.8030102@neclab.eu> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <4FCE07D1.8030102@neclab.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.10 Subject: [cuss] Fwd: Call for Papers: IAB/IRTF Workshop on Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication, July 28, 2012 Vancouver, Canada X-BeenThere: cuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Call Control UUI for SIP \(cuss\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:26:43 -0000 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: IAB Chair Date: Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM Subject: [IAB] Call for Papers: IAB/IRTF Workshop on Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication, July 28, 2012 Vancouver, Canada To: ietf-announce@ietf.org Cc: iab@iab.org IAB / IRTF Workshop on Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication July 28, 2012 Vancouver, Canada The IAB and IRTF will hold a workshop on Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Communication" in Vancouver, Canada on Saturday, July 28th, 2012 prior to the IETF-84 meeting (see http://www.ietf.org/meeting/84/index.html). Participation at the workshop is free of charge. There is no requirement to either register with or attend the IETF-84 meeting that follows the workshop. The workshop organizers would like to foster a discussion on: What are appropriate congestion signals to use for interactive media and data? What existing congestion control algorithms are appropriate for interactive media and data? What properties would be desirable in new congestion control algorithms? Measurement and/or simulations of new congestion signals (e.g., delay-based) and their interaction with existing congestion control mechanisms. What are good available techniques for adjusting sending rates for interactive media and data? What are the limits of those techniques? What properties would be desirable in new techniques? What application-specific considerations have to be taken into account? How can we ensure that real-time communications are well-behaved with respect to other Internet applications while still providing good quality? What should the IETF and/or IRTF do? The organizers seek position papers on any or all of these topics, as well as other topics related to congestion control for interactive realtime media. Every prospective workshop participant must submit a position paper containing a name and an email address. Authors of accepted papers will be invited to the workshop. Papers up to 3 pages, formatted in HTML, PDF, or plain text (for example, as a submitted Internet-Draft) are ideal. Accepted position papers will be published. Additional details about the meeting venue will be provided to authors of accepted papers. Important Dates Position paper submission deadline: June 23, 2012 Notification to paper authors: June 30, 2012 Workshop date: July 28, 2012 Additional Details Additional details on the workshop as well as the submission process is available at http://www.iab.org/cc-workshop/ Contact To sponsors: If you are interested to help us working towards better interactive media congestion control mechanisms on the Internet (such as by making a contribution towards catering costs and room rental), please contact us! In case of questions please send email to mary.ietf.barnes at gmail.com. -- IETF Transport Area Director martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL Registered in England 283 - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurbani@alcatel-lucent.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ From vkg@bell-labs.com Thu Jun 7 07:09:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B4DA21F855F for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 07:09:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B4PbEcJFm26K for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 07:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B27AE21F8552 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 07:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.11]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id q57E9o8a001051 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:09:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: from umail.lucent.com (umail-ce2.ndc.lucent.com [135.3.40.63]) by usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id q57E9oUo012856 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:09:50 -0500 Received: from shoonya.ih.lucent.com (shoonya.ih.lucent.com [135.185.237.229]) by umail.lucent.com (8.13.8/TPES) with ESMTP id q57E9nqJ002212 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:09:49 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <4FD0B77D.2010501@bell-labs.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:15:25 -0500 From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" Organization: Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cuss@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.11 Subject: [cuss] Status of cuss documents X-BeenThere: cuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Call Control UUI for SIP \(cuss\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:09:52 -0000 Folks: The WGLC date for the two remaining documents has passed. The WG received a WGLC review on draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-06 courtesy of Laura Liess. The review for draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-isdn-04 is still pending, and should be out by next week. In the meantime, could the authors of draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui please start to address the WGLC comments and sent out a revision addressing the comments? To the extent that there are dependencies between these two drafts, I suspect that cuss-sip-uui-isdn depends on cuss-sip-uui. Thus we can start preparation for cuss-sip-uui while we wait for the WGLC review of cuss-sip-uui-isdn. Thanks, Vijay K. Gurbani and Enrico Marocco From alan.b.johnston@gmail.com Thu Jun 7 13:07:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A8D11E80AD for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 13:07:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.932 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EtOXZ37xUi4n for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 13:07:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C51921F85AA for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 13:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so852905ghb.31 for ; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:07:46 -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=JnZ4rcC7qUJ5xKYFpJiCEH7ylb/9JrWHUGCzKKdwRUI=; b=VFENYLgXKCIv6HhevfAsh4nJtqBV1nGuXw/0HMU6jWxN3GRGaMLyKDrL9coWijqpcU 8x3avBXKeTVFcy83ky769Lk1Ct/degeADmzBYtjI8pU/KEI2sQzN/gML15huBerpkNJX A88BIrGfregwREoQrJDErMCv7Tk+zNxmouLKKlGiUD8xJNzhoVzG4DmHnkDidPjbcuH/ G1utlqQVR0CMbLyvjmuuPuNYdEXmkFza+5/XClptdBbglhZNNUxXWdLJ9htQoVOt51XE Pa+lotS53FDcDIUACUvPkiO66HpF/XFqT+woR3Iz3vvt+rRTI39RUCcPkX+W4WfaNma6 Xvog== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.20.198 with SMTP id p6mr3451151oee.60.1339099666595; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.13.136 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 13:07:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FD0B77D.2010501@bell-labs.com> References: <4FD0B77D.2010501@bell-labs.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 15:07:46 -0500 Message-ID: From: Alan Johnston To: "Vijay K. Gurbani" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff1c796f23e2f04c1e76f08 Cc: cuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [cuss] Status of cuss documents X-BeenThere: cuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Call Control UUI for SIP \(cuss\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:07:52 -0000 --e89a8ff1c796f23e2f04c1e76f08 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Will do. - Alan - On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote: > Folks: The WGLC date for the two remaining documents has passed. > > The WG received a WGLC review on draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-06 courtesy > of Laura Liess. > > The review for draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-isdn-**04 is still pending, and > should be out by next week. > > In the meantime, could the authors of draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui please > start to address the WGLC comments and sent out a revision addressing > the comments? > > To the extent that there are dependencies between these two drafts, I > suspect that cuss-sip-uui-isdn depends on cuss-sip-uui. Thus we can > start preparation for cuss-sip-uui while we wait for the WGLC review > of cuss-sip-uui-isdn. > > Thanks, > > Vijay K. Gurbani and Enrico Marocco > > ______________________________**_________________ > cuss mailing list > cuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/cuss > --e89a8ff1c796f23e2f04c1e76f08 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Will do.

- Alan -

On T= hu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani <vkg@bell-labs.com> wrote:
Folks: The WGLC date for the two remaining d= ocuments has passed.

The WG received a WGLC review on draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-06 courtesy
of Laura Liess.

The review for draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-isdn-04 is still pending, and=
should be out by next week.

In the meantime, could the authors of draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui please
start to address the WGLC comments and sent out a revision addressing
the comments?

To the extent that there are dependencies between these two drafts, I
suspect that cuss-sip-uui-isdn depends on cuss-sip-uui. =A0Thus we can
start preparation for cuss-sip-uui while we wait for the WGLC review
of cuss-sip-uui-isdn.

Thanks,

Vijay K. Gurbani and Enrico Marocco

_______________________________________________
cuss mailing list
cuss@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cuss

--e89a8ff1c796f23e2f04c1e76f08-- From R.Jesske@telekom.de Mon Jun 11 23:00:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6944111E8097 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 23:00:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lHpOOBruycg7 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 23:00:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail13.telekom.de (tcmail13.telekom.de [80.149.113.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0402911E8095 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 23:00:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he111630.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.22]) by tcmail11.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 12 Jun 2012 08:00:55 +0200 Received: from HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.17]) by HE111630.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 08:00:54 +0200 From: To: , Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 08:00:52 +0200 Thread-Topic: [cuss] Status of cuss documents Thread-Index: Ac1EtziDuQLbhnwNRe+cOPKRqwUnDADqUyyg Message-ID: <580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D1434C4D89A@HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <4FD0B77D.2010501@bell-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <4FD0B77D.2010501@bell-labs.com> Accept-Language: de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [cuss] Status of cuss documents X-BeenThere: cuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Call Control UUI for SIP \(cuss\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 06:01:00 -0000 Dear all, The review was already posed on May 21 Please see: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cuss/current/msg00415.html BR Roland -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- Von: cuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:cuss-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Vi= jay K. Gurbani Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2012 16:15 An: cuss@ietf.org Betreff: [cuss] Status of cuss documents Folks: The WGLC date for the two remaining documents has passed. The WG received a WGLC review on draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-06 courtesy of Lau= ra Liess. The review for draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-isdn-04 is still pending, and should= be out by next week. In the meantime, could the authors of draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui please start = to address the WGLC comments and sent out a revision addressing the comment= s? To the extent that there are dependencies between these two drafts, I suspe= ct that cuss-sip-uui-isdn depends on cuss-sip-uui. Thus we can start prepa= ration for cuss-sip-uui while we wait for the WGLC review of cuss-sip-uui-i= sdn. Thanks, Vijay K. Gurbani and Enrico Marocco _______________________________________________ cuss mailing list cuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cuss From vkg@bell-labs.com Tue Jun 12 08:43:13 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3811721F86B5 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 08:43:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id onLiKDz25ung for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 08:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478F721F86B4 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 08:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usnavsmail4.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail4.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.12]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id q5CFhB14006009 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:43:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: from umail.lucent.com (umail-ce2.ndc.lucent.com [135.3.40.63]) by usnavsmail4.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id q5CFhAia013308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:43:11 -0500 Received: from shoonya.ih.lucent.com (vkg.lra.lucent.com [135.244.145.47] (may be forged)) by umail.lucent.com (8.13.8/TPES) with ESMTP id q5CFhAgk001457; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:43:10 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <4FD764E1.1050904@bell-labs.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:48:49 -0500 From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" Organization: Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: R.Jesske@telekom.de References: <4FD0B77D.2010501@bell-labs.com> <580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D1434C4D89A@HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> In-Reply-To: <580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D1434C4D89A@HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.12 Cc: cuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [cuss] Status of cuss documents X-BeenThere: cuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Call Control UUI for SIP \(cuss\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:43:13 -0000 On 06/12/2012 01:00 AM, R.Jesske@telekom.de wrote: > Dear all, > The review was already posed on May 21 > Please see: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cuss/current/msg00415.html Roland: Ah, OK. For some reason I missed that review. Enrico and I will be in touch with the authors to ensure next steps in form of revised IDs. Thank you for your review. - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurbani@alcatel-lucent.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ From alan.b.johnston@gmail.com Thu Jun 14 09:26:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cuss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242B421F861F for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uhWKFhvIwAxN for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7544C21F841B for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbwc20 with SMTP id wc20so1593206obb.31 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:24 -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=uB8rKPnGGUIGv2zM742by6ddJ9uZnElSKimurSDuJWA=; b=QxAvI5OSGdkth1vsgdFC5gXl8R44J4rAnrQ3LduDGWwVJjvMx18tulSB5MRjUlzunE NdSbE0XOqYNEa+E+hyj0EGGD+xyzLsp1glebKfOBCH0eogipI/Kw9ELd323X+cnrnO3D G8SWEKjCRNnDnemTQCVV3BNYjYXUL4ccx8Lpk47mDEQneV9LEU2UVYQeaM2o0Iea4vj6 zKKRgwKQFfLf7DIXDQvtq+Y3xqfxZNwQvWmzMEnEXvuk+JYP5rMhxPMcE+cbkZ3c7dOI ImxADcWFENzLT47SwxtFQoVzxQHgJ90WYZrzJ8ANT2uAKVB6sylp2eUrQL3mJv7o3g2d /4Yg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.145.40 with SMTP id sr8mr2506037obb.42.1339691184060; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.13.136 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4FBF97C9.7000105@alum.mit.edu> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:26:23 -0500 Message-ID: From: Alan Johnston To: Laura Liess Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044632322278d904c27129e6 Cc: cuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [cuss] WGLC review for draft-ietf-cuss-sip-uui-06 X-BeenThere: cuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Call Control UUI for SIP \(cuss\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:26:28 -0000 --f46d044632322278d904c27129e6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 You are both right, I guess. I'm fine with this proposal for a new content to define the encodings allowed. I don't think we have any other encodings besides 'hex' in use or defined, so I think we will be OK for the ISDN service. - Alan - On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Laura Liess wrote: > Paul, > > 2012/5/25 Paul Kyzivat : > > > > > While looking at this I realized something else. Given the way we have > > evolved the use of "encoding", I think it would make sense to bind the > valid > > encodings to a particular content value, rather than to a particular > > package. So, when defining a new "content" one would have to specify > which > > encoding(s) it may have. When specifying a new package one would only > need > > to specify what content values it may have. > > I agree with you. It makes much more sense to bind the encodings to > content values instead of packages. And easier to understand. > > Just I am not sure which consequencies would this change have for both > drafts and if we do not run again into the "existing implementation" > issue. > > I would like to know Alan's and Keith's and FT's opinion. > > Thanks a lot > Laura > > > > > Thanks, > > Paul > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cuss mailing list > > cuss@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cuss > --f46d044632322278d904c27129e6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You are both right, I guess. =A0I'm fine with this proposal for a new c= ontent to define the encodings allowed. =A0

I don't = think we have any other encodings besides 'hex' in use or defined, = so I think we will be OK for the ISDN service.

- Alan -

On Tue, May = 29, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.co= m> wrote:
Paul,

2012/5/25 Paul Kyzivat <pkyziva= t@alum.mit.edu>:

>
> While looking at this I realized something else. Given the way we have=
> evolved the use of "encoding", I think it would make sense t= o bind the valid
> encodings to a particular content value, rather than to a particular > package. So, when defining a new "content" one would have to= specify which
> encoding(s) it may have. When specifying a new package one would only = need
> to specify what content values it may have.

I agree with you. =A0It makes much more sense to bind the encodings to
content values instead of packages. And easier to understand.

Just I am not sure which consequencies would this change have for both
drafts and if we do not run again into the "existing implementation&qu= ot;
issue.

I would like to know Alan's and Keith's and FT's opinion.

Thanks a lot
Laura



> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Thanks,
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> cuss mailing list
> cuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cuss

--f46d044632322278d904c27129e6--