Subject: Re: [Slim] Last Call: <draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-06.txt> (Negotiating Human Language in Real-Time Communications) to Proposed Standard

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:16:05 -0700

Paul Kyzivat wrote:

> Gunnar's comment makes multiple points. You have highlighted one of
> them and ignored the others.

Some of Gunnar's points were excellent, such as the observation that the
terminology is inconsistent as to whether the asterisk is part of the
tag.

I did not attempt to respond to all of Gunnar's points, nor did I think
that was necessary.

> I accept the WG's decision not to address the "preference" issue. But
> this attachment to the "ugly child", if not addressed, invites getting
> IESG LC comments.

I'm not sure what this refers to, but I'm happy to refrain from further
comments on this LC if you think they might put the draft in jeopardy.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org

---

From: Bernard Aboba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:07:15 -0800

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sabrina Tanamal via RT <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 7:50 AM
Subject: [IANA #948015] Last Call:
<draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-06.txt> (Negotiating Human
Language in Real-Time Communications) to Proposed Standard
To:
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
[email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
[email-masked]

(BEGIN IANA COMMENTS)

IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA Services Operator has completed its review of
draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-06.txt. If any part of this
review is inaccurate, please let us know.

We have a question about one of the actions requested in the IANA
Considerations section of this document.

The IANA Services Operator understands that, upon approval of this
document, there is a single action which we must complete.

In the att-field (media level only) subregistry of the Session Description
Protocol (SDP) Parameters registry located at:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/sdp-parameters/

two new registrations are to be made as follows:

Type: att-field (media level only)
SDP Name: humintlang-recv
MUX Category:
Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]

Type: att-field (media level only)
SDP Name: humintlang-send
MUX Category:
Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]

IANA Services Operator Question --> What should the MUX Category be for
these two new registrations?

Because this registry requires Expert Review [RFC5226] for registration,
we've contacted the IESG-designated expert in a separate ticket to request
approval. Expert review should be completed before your document can be
approved for publication as an RFC.

The IANA Services Operator understands that this is the only action
required to be completed upon approval of this document.

Note:  The actions requested in this document will not be completed until
the document has been approved for publication as an RFC. This message is
only to confirm what actions will be performed.

Thank you,

Sabrina Tanamal
IANA Services Specialist
PTI

(END IANA COMMENTS)