Subject: [cuss] No F2F meeting in March IETF

From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:03:21 -0600

Folks: Based on the rather tepid response to the question on "to meet
or not to meet" in Orlando IETF, it seems that a F2F meeting is not
required.  Accordingly, Enrico and I will not ask for one.

That said, the work has to continue.

Enrico and I will like to urge the list participants to respond to Mr.
Rafferty's call for opinion on the appropriate IANA policy [1].  In the
absence of any other proposal, the current "Standards Action" policy
will be adopted.  Mr. Kyzivat has noted that this may suffice for the
ISDN use case but not for others.  However, he is fine if we proceed
with "Standards Action" (at least that is my interpretation).

So, please chime in now or we will proceed with "Standards Action".  If
it helps to set a deadline to close the opinion call in [1], we can go
with requesting that the WG express opinions by January 28, 2013 in
favor of the current approach or provide new approaches

And finally, I will like to urge the authors of the ISDN use case
draft that a discussion was opened up in a thread [2] in July 2012.
That thread seemed to have culminated in November 9 2012.  So I suspect
the authors of this draft can release a new version that can be moved
ahead.

[1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cuss/current/msg00451.html
[2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cuss/current/msg00429.html

Thanks,

- 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} / [email-masked]
Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/