From ag@ag-projects.com Mon Feb 4 05:08:23 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EEDE21F85B1; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 05:08:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.129 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.129 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id piq5oXXvbdyl; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 05:08:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node06.dns-hosting.info [85.17.186.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 897A721F84E0; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 05:08:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix, from userid 5001) id D85ABB35E2; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 14:08:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from ag-retina.fritz.box (xs4all.dns-hosting.info [82.161.39.123]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6906CB35E0; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 14:08:10 +0100 (CET) From: Adrian Georgescu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 14:08:11 +0100 Message-Id: <67896036-9CE7-427A-9D15-3B75C76CE829@ag-projects.com> To: xmpp@ietf.org, dispatch@ietf.org, simple@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Subject: [Simple] Feedback for SIMPLE/MSRP to XMPP interoperability X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 13:08:23 -0000 Hello, By implementing the draft specifications for SIMPLE/MSRP to XMPP and = MSRP-switch to MUC gateway we discovered several issues that we needed = to tackle differently or were not addressed at all at the moment of = their writing. The drafts I am referring to are: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-core-01 = http://xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-presence-02.html= http://xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-im-01.html http://xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-chat-03.html = http://xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-groupchat-01.htm= l As there are many comments, we made a web page to summarize them as best = as we could. http://sylkserver.ag-projects.com/projects/sylkserver/wiki/XMPP-Interop The software implementing these drafts is now available in the public = domain. I hope this feedback can be used to continue and finalize the = standardization works started in those drafts. I am not sure which WG is = the best place for this, so I mailed all three I am aware of. Regards, Adrian =20 =20= From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Tue Feb 5 02:26:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 911F321F8803 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:26:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.359 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.359 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.241, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gy22ELjUKSJn for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:26:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E82A21F8801 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:26:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id EC98AB1E002; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:25:14 -0800 (PST) To: jari.urpalainen@nokia.com, gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com, rjsparks@nostrum.com, hisham.khartabil@gmail.com, ben@nostrum.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20130205102514.EC98AB1E002@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:25:14 -0800 (PST) Cc: dret@berkeley.edu, simple@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (3477) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 10:26:24 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5261, "An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5261&eid=3477 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Erik Wilde Section: 4.2.2 Original Text ------------- In XPath 2.0, a "bar" selector not only matches an unqualified element, but also matches a qualified element that is in scope of a default namespace declaration. In contrast, in this specification, a selector without a prefix only matches one element, and it may match an element with or without a prefix but only if the namespace it's qualified with (or none) is an exact match. Corrected Text -------------- In XPath 2.0, a "bar" selector matches elements that have the URI of the "default element/type namespace", which is part of an XPath's static context. By setting this URI to the default namespace of the diff document (or leave it empty, if there is none), XPath 2.0's behavior matches the requirements of the previous section. Notes ----- The original text is not easy to understand, but seems to assume that an unprefixed name in XPath 2.0 matches both unprefixed names, and prefixed ones that have the same namespace than the default namespace of the XPath static context. This is not the case: Matching depends on how the "default element/type namespace" of the XPath static context is defined, and then matches either namespace-less elements, or those in the "default element/type namespace", but never both. This context, however, is defined by the XPath itself, not by the document. Thus, it can be set externally and could be set to the diff document's default namespace (if there is one). In that case, XPath 2.0 can be used to evaluate XML Patch selectors. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5261 (draft-ietf-simple-xml-patch-ops-04) -------------------------------------- Title : An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors Publication Date : September 2008 Author(s) : J. Urpalainen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From derhoermi@gmx.net Tue Feb 5 03:17:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23FB921F8716 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 03:17:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.932 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.333, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id odjW+p8s51Ox for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 03:17:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D1921F86F0 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 03:17:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.1]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx002) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0M8ntS-1UEkGQ3P3c-00CCqR for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 12:17:02 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 05 Feb 2013 11:17:02 -0000 Received: from p5B062596.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO netb.Speedport_W_700V) [91.6.37.150] by mail.gmx.net (mp001) with SMTP; 05 Feb 2013 12:17:02 +0100 X-Authenticated: #723575 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19pHBcSZYJpvIz+NVXeGCPZpeUw72MvqVJ5XDDfru iAUfA6IPwWe5Nz From: Bjoern Hoehrmann To: RFC Errata System Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 12:16:58 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20130205102514.EC98AB1E002@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <20130205102514.EC98AB1E002@rfc-editor.org> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: dret@berkeley.edu, jari.urpalainen@nokia.com, simple@ietf.org, hisham.khartabil@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (3477) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 11:17:05 -0000 * RFC Errata System wrote: >Original Text >------------- >In XPath 2.0, a "bar" selector >not only matches an unqualified element, but also matches a >qualified element that is in scope of a default namespace >declaration. In contrast, in this specification, a selector without >a prefix only matches one element, and it may match an element with >or without a prefix but only if the namespace it's qualified with (or >none) is an exact match. >Notes >----- >The original text is not easy to understand, but seems to assume that >an unprefixed name in XPath 2.0 matches both unprefixed names, and >prefixed ones that have the same namespace than the default namespace of >the XPath static context. This is not the case: Matching depends on how >the "default element/type namespace" of the XPath static context is >defined, and then matches either namespace-less elements, or those in >the "default element/type namespace", but never both. This context, >however, is defined by the XPath itself, not by the document. Thus, it >can be set externally and could be set to the diff document's default >namespace (if there is one). In that case, XPath 2.0 can be used to >evaluate XML Patch selectors. Indeed, see , 3rd paragraph. (I do note that this is not the only difference between XPath 1.0 and XPath 2.0, so the conclusion that then XPath 2.0 can be used to evalu- ate XML Patch selectors is not necessarily correct, especially if it cannot be assumed that defaults like "Default element/type namespace" cannot be assumed to be chosen to maximise compatibility. But that is out of scope of the Original Text this item is concerned with.) -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Thu Feb 7 07:40:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325FD21F8782 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.373 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.227, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QX6VU6D5uAJK for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819A121F871D for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 41DEAB1E002; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:41 -0800 (PST) To: jari.urpalainen@nokia.com, gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com, rjsparks@nostrum.com, hisham.khartabil@gmail.com, ben@nostrum.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20130207154041.41DEAB1E002@rfc-editor.org> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 07:40:41 -0800 (PST) Cc: dret@berkeley.edu, simple@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (3478) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 15:40:45 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5261, "An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5261&eid=3478 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Erik Wilde Section: 4.4.3 Original Text ------------- 4.4.3. Replacing a Namespace Declaration URI An example for a replacement of a namespace URI: urn:new:xxx This will replace the URI value of 'pref' prefixed namespace node with "urn:new:xxx". The parent node of the namespace declaration MUST be the element, otherwise an error occurs. Corrected Text -------------- 4.4.3. Replacing a Namespace URI An example for a replacement of a namespace URI: urn:new:xxx This will replace the URI of the namespace associated with the 'pref' prefix with "urn:new:xxx". The parent node of the namespace declaration MUST be the element, otherwise an error occurs. Replacing the namespace at the element where it is declared MUST also change all namespace nodes derived from this declaration in descendant elements. Notes ----- The spec uses the terms "namespace declaration" and "namespace" almost interchangeably, which is incorrect. It is impossible to select (and thus patch) *namespace declarations* using XPath. When selecting and replacing a *namespace*, then it should be taken into account that the *namespace declaration* very likely has resulted in numerous namespace nodes, attached to child elements of the element where the namespace was declared. It is likely that the spec intended to specify a "recursive replace" of the resulting namespace nodes of a namespace declaration, and this is what the corrected text suggests. The original text is mixing terminology, hard to read, and ambiguous in its meaning. If the spec text instead tried to specify that really only this one namespace node should be changed, then this can lead to rather strange effects in the resulting document, since the XPath tree now has "orphan" namespace nodes, which then need to be serialized and namespace declarations in locations where previously no namespace declarations occurred. One way or the other, this ambiguity needs to be clarified to make the spec easier to read and implement. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5261 (draft-ietf-simple-xml-patch-ops-04) -------------------------------------- Title : An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors Publication Date : September 2008 Author(s) : J. Urpalainen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From dret@berkeley.edu Tue Feb 5 05:17:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786BE21F85D6 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 05:17:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eZ1sxbBaUYr2 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 05:17:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from cm06fe.IST.Berkeley.EDU (cm06fe.IST.Berkeley.EDU [169.229.218.147]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9512621F85AC for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 05:17:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from 46-126-158-51.dynamic.hispeed.ch ([46.126.158.51] helo=dretair.local) by cm06fe.ist.berkeley.edu with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (auth plain:dret@berkeley.edu) (envelope-from ) id 1U2iP7-0006SS-Ln; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 05:17:42 -0800 Message-ID: <5111066E.8000400@berkeley.edu> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:17:34 +0100 From: Erik Wilde User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bjoern Hoehrmann References: <20130205102514.EC98AB1E002@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 08:08:30 -0800 Cc: Bas de Bakker , Cornelia Davis , jari.urpalainen@nokia.com, Mark Nottingham , Norman Walsh , simple@ietf.org, hisham.khartabil@gmail.com, Jonathan Robie , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [Simple] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5261 (3477) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 13:17:49 -0000 hello bjoern. thanks a lot for the quick feedback! On 2013-02-05 12:16 , Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * RFC Errata System wrote: >> Notes >> ----- >> The original text is not easy to understand, but seems to assume that >> an unprefixed name in XPath 2.0 matches both unprefixed names, and >> prefixed ones that have the same namespace than the default namespace of >> the XPath static context. This is not the case: Matching depends on how >> the "default element/type namespace" of the XPath static context is >> defined, and then matches either namespace-less elements, or those in >> the "default element/type namespace", but never both. This context, >> however, is defined by the XPath itself, not by the document. Thus, it >> can be set externally and could be set to the diff document's default >> namespace (if there is one). In that case, XPath 2.0 can be used to >> evaluate XML Patch selectors. > > Indeed, see , 3rd paragraph. > (I do note that this is not the only difference between XPath 1.0 and > XPath 2.0, so the conclusion that then XPath 2.0 can be used to evalu- > ate XML Patch selectors is not necessarily correct, especially if it > cannot be assumed that defaults like "Default element/type namespace" > cannot be assumed to be chosen to maximise compatibility. But that is > out of scope of the Original Text this item is concerned with.) yes, you're right that this is not necessarily a correct conclusion. it would be really great to figure this out, though, because the convenience of being able to use a standard implementation cannot be overstated. i am writing http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-xml-patch-01 which is intended to be based on RFC 5261 (which is why am reading it very closely now), and it would be great to have an implementation hints section (i am currently writing one) that would clearly tell implementers what they can and cannot use. it's bad enough that you cannot use a standard XPath 1.0 implementation; it would be great if at least XPath 2.0 would be usable. any insights would be greatly appreciated, i think i have to look closer into the XPath subset of the RFC and see whether that contains anything where XPath 1.0 and 2.0 differ. in the interest of readability, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-xml-patch-01#appendix-B now has an ABNF for the grammar in RFC 5261, where it's only defined in the XSD. i have also filed an erratum about the grammar, because it allows "id()", which never selects anything: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5261&eid=3458 thanks again and cheers, dret. -- erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret | From jdrosen@jdrosen.net Sat Feb 16 04:37:22 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8835B21F8464 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:37:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d789F8Slct+P for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:37:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com (ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com [70.39.232.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4481021F8462 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:37:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181]:59760) by ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1U6h16-0004rq-7a for simple@ietf.org; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 07:37:20 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f181.google.com with SMTP id hm6so2062833wib.14 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:37:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.8.4 with SMTP id n4mr9183733wia.13.1361018240013; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:37:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.165.230 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:37:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20130129004453.17046.96903.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4351AF92-3E60-4967-890B-33291473A10E@nostrum.com> <27757F55-1837-4CC0-B65D-07B1CA6F661A@edvina.net> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 07:37:19 -0500 Message-ID: From: Jonathan Rosenberg To: Ben Campbell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428f18ba944a04d5d6c029 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ecbiz71.inmotionhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jdrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: Simple WG Subject: Re: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-simple-08.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:37:22 -0000 --f46d04428f18ba944a04d5d6c029 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Olle, I agree with Ben's assessment above. When we started this draft, we decided on a fairly hard definition around scope of what is included, and what is not. We purposely are not including the many SIP extensions that apply in general to SIP, including presence. As such, I do not think we should include rfc6072 or 5922. Similarly I dont think a section on xcap (useful as it might be) belongs here. I look forward to seeing your draft ;) Thanks, Jonathan R. On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > (as chair) > > Robert has asked us to progress this as soon as possible. I plan to go > ahead and do that for the existing version. > > That does _not_ mean we should ignore feedback, nor should we shut down > this discussion. We will just treat any further comments and discussion as > if they were IETF Last Call comments. > > Thanks! > > Ben. > > On Jan 30, 2013, at 1:49 AM, Olle E Johanson wrote: > > > > > 29 jan 2013 kl. 15:17 skrev Ben Campbell : > > > >> (as chair) > >> > >> We had a WGLC on version 06 of draft-ietf-simple-simple some time (as > in years) ago. It's been on hold since then to allow the other SIMPLE work > to substantially complete. Since our penultimate milestone (simple-chat) > has recently been approved by the IESG, it's time to progress simple-simple > and complete our final chartered milestone. > >> > >> The only non-trivial change between 06 and 08 was the split of the > entry for the old msrp-acm draft into separate entries for RFC 6135 > (COMEDIA for MSRP) and RFC 6174 (CEMA), to account for the split of that > draft. > >> > >> After conferring with the author and our AD, I think these changes are > pretty obvious and not likely to be controversial. Therefore we plan to > request publication of version 08. If anyone objects to that course of > action, please speak up asap. > > > > Ok, I know I had years to make a comment, but anyway :-) > > > > I would like to see references to the SIP domain certificate > specification, as it plays a role for implementors, as well as the SIP > certificate management service. These should be important for anyone > building SIMPLE implementations and adds some missing pieces in the SIMPLE > specs. > > > > - RFC 6072 Certificate Maangement Service for Session Initiation Protocol > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6072 > > - RFC 5922 Domain Certificates in the Session Initiation Protocol > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5922 > > > > Maybe we could add a clarification for newbies that "The SIP > subscribe/notify mechanism is not only used in SIMPLE, but also in other > event packages outside of the scope of this document." > > > > > > I could possibly also add a section about the missing interoperability > in presence/XCAP implementations but that propably won't help this > particular document that I find has a lot of value. > > > > See you all at SIPit 30! Only a few days of registration open - so > please hurry to http://www.sipit.net and register! > > /O > > > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Ben. > >> > >>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > >>> Subject: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-simple-08.txt > >>> Date: January 28, 2013 6:44:53 PM CST > >>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >>> Cc: simple@ietf.org > >>> > >>> > >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > >>> This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and > Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. > >>> > >>> Title : SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF > Specifications for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session > Initiation Protocol (SIP) > >>> Author(s) : Jonathan Rosenberg > >>> Filename : draft-ietf-simple-simple-08.txt > >>> Pages : 15 > >>> Date : 2013-01-28 > >>> > >>> Abstract: > >>> The IETF has produced many specifications related to Presence and > >>> Instant Messaging with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). > >>> Collectively, these specifications are known as SIMPLE - SIP for > >>> Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions. This document > >>> serves as a guide to the SIMPLE suite of specifications. It breaks > >>> them up into categories and explains what each is for and how they > >>> relate to each other. > >>> > >>> > >>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-simple-simple > >>> > >>> There's also a htmlized version available at: > >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-simple-simple-08 > >>> > >>> A diff from the previous version is available at: > >>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-simple-simple-08 > >>> > >>> > >>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Simple mailing list > >>> Simple@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Simple mailing list > >> Simple@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > -- Jonathan Rosenberg, Ph.D. jdrosen@jdrosen.net http://www.jdrosen.net --f46d04428f18ba944a04d5d6c029 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Olle,

I agree with Ben's asse= ssment above. When we started this draft, we decided on a fairly hard defin= ition around scope of what is included, and what is not. We purposely are n= ot including the many SIP extensions that apply in general to SIP, includin= g presence. As such, I do not think we should include rfc6072 or 5922. Simi= larly I dont think a section on xcap (useful as it might be) belongs here. = I look forward to seeing your draft ;)

Thanks,
Jonathan R.



On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
(as chair)

Robert has asked us to progress this as soon as possible. I plan to go ahea= d and do that for the existing version.

That does _not_ mean we should ignore feedback, nor should we shut down thi= s discussion. We will just treat any further comments and discussion as if = they were IETF Last Call comments.

Thanks!

Ben.

On Jan 30, 2013, at 1:49 AM, Olle E Johanson <oej@edvina.net> wrote:

>
> 29 jan 2013 kl. 15:17 sk= rev Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com= >:
>
>> (as chair)
>>
>> We had a WGLC on version 06 of draft-ietf-simple-simple some time = (as in years) ago. It's been on hold since then to allow the other SIMP= LE work to substantially complete. Since our penultimate milestone (simple-= chat) has recently been approved by the IESG, it's time to progress sim= ple-simple and complete our final chartered milestone.
>>
>> The only non-trivial change between 06 and 08 was the split of the= entry for the old msrp-acm draft into separate entries for RFC 6135 (COMED= IA for MSRP) and RFC 6174 (CEMA), to account for the split of that draft. >>
>> After conferring with the author and our AD, I think these changes= are pretty obvious and not likely to be controversial. Therefore we plan t= o request publication of version 08. If anyone objects to that course of ac= tion, please speak up asap.
>
> Ok, I know I had years to make a comment, but anyway :-)
>
> I would like to see references to the SIP domain certificate specifica= tion, as it plays a role for implementors, as well as the SIP certificate m= anagement service. These should be important for anyone building SIMPLE imp= lementations and adds some missing pieces in the SIMPLE specs.
>
> - RFC 6072 Certificate Maangement Service for Session Initiation Proto= col
> =A0 h= ttp://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6072
> - RFC 5922 Domain Certificates in the Session Initiation Protocol
> =A0ht= tp://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5922
>
> Maybe we could add a clarification for newbies that "The SIP subs= cribe/notify mechanism is not only used in SIMPLE, but also in other event = packages outside of the scope of this document."
>
>
> I could possibly also add a section about the missing interoperability= in presence/XCAP implementations but that propably won't help this par= ticular document that I find has a lot of value.
>
> See you all at SIPit 30! Only a few days of registration open - so ple= ase hurry to http://www.= sipit.net and register!
> /O
>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Ben.
>>
>>> From: internet-dra= fts@ietf.org
>>> Subject: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-simple-08.txt<= br> >>> Date: January 28, 2013 6:44:53 PM CST
>>> To: i-d-announce@ietf= .org
>>> Cc: simple@ietf.org
>>>
>>>
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Dr= afts directories.
>>> This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and= Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF.
>>>
>>> =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : SIMPLE made Simple: An Ove= rview of the IETF Specifications for Instant Messaging and Presence using t= he Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
>>> =A0 =A0 Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : Jonathan Rosenberg
>>> =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-simple-simple-08.= txt
>>> =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 15
>>> =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2013-01-28
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>> The IETF has produced many specifications related to Presence = and
>>> Instant Messaging with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).<= br> >>> Collectively, these specifications are known as SIMPLE - SIP f= or
>>> Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions. =A0This = document
>>> serves as a guide to the SIMPLE suite of specifications. =A0It= breaks
>>> them up into categories and explains what each is for and how = they
>>> relate to each other.
>>>
>>>
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-simpl= e-simple
>>>
>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-simple-simple-= 08
>>>
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-iet= f-simple-simple-08
>>>
>>>
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Simple mailing list
>>> Simple@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Simple mailing list
>> Simple@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
>




--
=
--f46d04428f18ba944a04d5d6c029-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sat Feb 16 04:41:59 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 023CD21F8576; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:41:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.556 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3-UZ4ANkJ+QS; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:41:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FE8A21F857B; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:41:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130216124158.13143.56400.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 04:41:58 -0800 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-simple-09.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:41:59 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Le= veraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF Specificatio= ns for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session Initiation Protocol= (SIP) Author(s) : Jonathan Rosenberg Filename : draft-ietf-simple-simple-09.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2013-02-16 Abstract: The IETF has produced many specifications related to Presence and Instant Messaging with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Collectively, these specifications are known as SIMPLE - SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions. This document serves as a guide to the SIMPLE suite of specifications. It categorizes the specifications and explains what each is for and how they relate to each other. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-simple-simple There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-simple-simple-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-simple-simple-09 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 14:51:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A1D921E8112; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6gQFWOp1hRIt; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC49021E812E; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225225101.19889.34613.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:01 -0800 Cc: simple chair , simple mailing list , RFC Editor Subject: [Simple] Document Action: 'SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF Specifications for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-simple-simple-09.txt) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:51:02 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF Specifications for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)' (draft-ietf-simple-simple-09.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Robert Sparks and Gonzalo Camarillo. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-simple-simple/ Technical Summary The IETF has produced many specifications related to Presence and Instant Messaging with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Collectively, these specifications are known as SIMPLE - SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions. This document serves as a guide to the SIMPLE suite of specifications. It breaks them up into categories and explains what each is for and how they relate to each other. Working Group Summary This document servers as a roadmap to the SIMPLE specifications. It introduces no technical content beyond the summaries of those specifications. While some of the referenced specifications had some degree of controversy, this draft was not controversial in itself. Document Quality. This document is a roadmap to other specifications, and therefore has no directly implementable content. The document has undergone normal working group review. There have been no specialized expert reviews, and the shepherd does not believe such reviews are needed, other than those normal for all documents (e.g. Gen-ART). Personnel The document shepherd for this document is Ben Campbell. The responsible Area Director is Robert Sparks. From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 14:51:03 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F137821E812E for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kg1p2UJeh744; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F3021E8120; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:02 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IANA X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 X-IETF-Draft-string: draft-ietf-simple-simple X-IETF-Draft-revision: 09 Message-ID: <20130225225102.19889.22874.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:51:02 -0800 Cc: simple chair , simple mailing list , RFC Editor Subject: [Simple] Document Action: 'SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF Specifications for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-simple-simple-09.txt) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: noreply@ietf.org List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:51:03 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF Specifications for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)' (draft-ietf-simple-simple-09.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Robert Sparks and Gonzalo Camarillo. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-simple-simple/ Technical Summary The IETF has produced many specifications related to Presence and Instant Messaging with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Collectively, these specifications are known as SIMPLE - SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions. This document serves as a guide to the SIMPLE suite of specifications. It breaks them up into categories and explains what each is for and how they relate to each other. Working Group Summary This document servers as a roadmap to the SIMPLE specifications. It introduces no technical content beyond the summaries of those specifications. While some of the referenced specifications had some degree of controversy, this draft was not controversial in itself. Document Quality. This document is a roadmap to other specifications, and therefore has no directly implementable content. The document has undergone normal working group review. There have been no specialized expert reviews, and the shepherd does not believe such reviews are needed, other than those normal for all documents (e.g. Gen-ART). Personnel The document shepherd for this document is Ben Campbell. The responsible Area Director is Robert Sparks. From ben@nostrum.com Tue Feb 26 07:04:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAFFE21F8880 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:04:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.556 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R8w8c3DrmF9m for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:04:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BBBF21F8696 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:04:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.14] (cpe-76-187-92-156.tx.res.rr.com [76.187.92.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1QF4G2t087044 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:04:17 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) From: Ben Campbell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:04:16 -0600 Message-Id: <73736EDE-1E85-412F-A8E5-67CE1A8363CD@nostrum.com> To: Simple WG Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 76.187.92.156 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Subject: [Simple] simple-simple X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:04:18 -0000 Hi everyone, The simple-simple draft has been approved for publication by the IESG. = Many thanks to Jonathan for his work on this, and all those who = participated in its discussion! Thanks! Ben.= From rjsparks@nostrum.com Tue Feb 26 08:50:53 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BE5C21F8A18 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:50:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02OHWNEUzmQQ for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:50:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBDEA21F88BE for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:50:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-173-57-99-236.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.57.99.236]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1QGon7W098593 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:50:49 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) Message-ID: <512CE7E9.9010206@nostrum.com> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:50:49 -0600 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simple WG , Gonzalo Camarillo , Richard Barnes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.57.99.236 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Subject: [Simple] Closing the SIMPLE WG X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:50:53 -0000 Folks - With the last of SIMPLE's documents going into the RFC Editor queue, I'm closing the group. It's been a long road since we demonstrated running code in Pittsburg at IETF 48's IMPP meeting in the summer of 2000. It's been great to be part of helping evolve those early ideas. I'm sure there will be new things to do related to SIMPLE in the future, and anticipate that we'll form new, focused working groups to work through them. DISPATCH will help us find the right structure to get any new work done. Thanks to everyone for the effort you've put into this working group over the years. I'm proud to have been a part of it. RjS From ben@nostrum.com Tue Feb 26 09:17:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65A9621F8A9B for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:17:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.558 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.042, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9Ga7HdQHIcKd for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:17:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B889121F8A8A for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 09:17:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.14] (cpe-76-187-92-156.tx.res.rr.com [76.187.92.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1QHH23b001575 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:17:02 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: <512CE7E9.9010206@nostrum.com> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:17:03 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <512CE7E9.9010206@nostrum.com> To: Simple WG X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 76.187.92.156 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: Hisham Khartabil Subject: Re: [Simple] Closing the SIMPLE WG X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:17:09 -0000 (As chair, for the last time) Hi Everyone, As Robert indicated, it's been a long, strange trip from there to here. = I'd like to personally thank all of our many draft editors, = contributors, and discussion participants over the last 13 years. Thanks = also go to Hisham and Robert for their chair roles at various times = along the way.=20 SIMPLE is still a living protocol suite. Please do not hesitate to bring = up issues and new ideas--that's what the DISPATCH process is all about. Thanks! Ben. On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Robert Sparks = wrote: > Folks - >=20 > With the last of SIMPLE's documents going into the RFC Editor queue, > I'm closing the group. It's been a long road since we demonstrated > running code in Pittsburg at IETF 48's IMPP meeting in the summer > of 2000. It's been great to be part of helping evolve those early = ideas. >=20 > I'm sure there will be new things to do related to SIMPLE in the = future, and > anticipate that we'll form new, focused working groups to work through = them. > DISPATCH will help us find the right structure to get any new work = done. >=20 > Thanks to everyone for the effort you've put into this working group = over > the years. I'm proud to have been a part of it. >=20 > RjS > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Tue Feb 26 12:57:54 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AC221F89AE; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:57:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id STHW6uIqLO6D; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:57:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B535A21F882A; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:57:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IESG Secretary To: IETF Announcement List X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40p1 Message-ID: <20130226205737.7774.82401.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:57:37 -0800 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:22:16 -0800 Subject: [Simple] WG Action: Conclusion of SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (simple) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:58:11 -0000 The SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (simple) i= n the = Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area has concluded. The IESG cont= act = persons are Gonzalo Camarillo and Robert Sparks. The mailing list will remain open. From oej@edvina.net Thu Feb 28 00:01:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF85621F8B8D for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:01:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FqI1Tv6J6ySe for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:00:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp7.webway.se (smtp7.webway.se [IPv6:2a02:920:212e::205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42DCB21F8B71 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 00:00:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.40.5] (h87-96-134-129.dynamic.se.alltele.net [87.96.134.129]) by smtp7.webway.se (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 944C093DE53; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 08:00:56 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: "Olle E. Johansson" In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:00:54 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3A41843E-C8A4-4ADD-BFAE-74D3E20E9555@edvina.net> References: <512CE7E9.9010206@nostrum.com> To: Ben Campbell X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Simple WG , Hisham Khartabil Subject: Re: [Simple] Closing the SIMPLE WG X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 08:01:02 -0000 26 feb 2013 kl. 18:17 skrev Ben Campbell : > (As chair, for the last time) >=20 > Hi Everyone, >=20 > As Robert indicated, it's been a long, strange trip from there to = here. I'd like to personally thank all of our many draft editors, = contributors, and discussion participants over the last 13 years. Thanks = also go to Hisham and Robert for their chair roles at various times = along the way.=20 >=20 > SIMPLE is still a living protocol suite. Please do not hesitate to = bring up issues and new ideas--that's what the DISPATCH process is all = about. >=20 > Thanks! Thank you both! Yes, let's try to focus on the interop issues in DISPATCH and see where = that takes us. /Olle >=20 > Ben. >=20 > On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Robert Sparks = wrote: >=20 >> Folks - >>=20 >> With the last of SIMPLE's documents going into the RFC Editor queue, >> I'm closing the group. It's been a long road since we demonstrated >> running code in Pittsburg at IETF 48's IMPP meeting in the summer >> of 2000. It's been great to be part of helping evolve those early = ideas. >>=20 >> I'm sure there will be new things to do related to SIMPLE in the = future, and >> anticipate that we'll form new, focused working groups to work = through them. >> DISPATCH will help us find the right structure to get any new work = done. >>=20 >> Thanks to everyone for the effort you've put into this working group = over >> the years. I'm proud to have been a part of it. >>=20 >> RjS >> _______________________________________________ >> Simple mailing list >> Simple@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple