Subject: [Simple] Poll: Adopt message exploder draft from SIMPLE?

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 13:23:29 -0500

The SIMPLE working group has been discussing mechanisms for sending a 
MESSAGE request to multiple recipients. It has been suggested that this 
work might be more-at-home in the SIPPING group, as we'll also be 
discussing "exploder" methods for otehr request types.

The current draft is:

draft-garcia-simple-message-exploder-00.txt

I expect to see this work, when completed, referenced by the usual set 
of external bodies that reference our work.

So, I'd like to ask the SIPPING working group: How do you feel about 
this? Anybody radically opposed to moving this from SIMPLE to SIPPING 
and adopting the work? Anybody radically in favor?

Thanks,

--
Dean Willis
SIPPING WG co-chair

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

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 09:29:00 +0300

Dean:

As an author of the MESSAGE exploder document, I agree with you that the 
document perhaps fits better in the SIPPING WG. I was about to publish a 
new version that included comments we got in the mailing list. I will 
wait until we reach consensus of which is the appropriate WG.

- Miguel

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 09:29:00 +0300

Dean:

- Miguel

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 09:30:25 -0500

I concur that this work belongs in SIPPING, and that it makes sense to 
coordinate it with the "exploding" efforts for different methods.

Dean Willis wrote:

> Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
> Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 09:30:25 -0500