Subject: [Sip] Author drafts for consideration at IETF#69

From: "DRAGE, Keith \(Keith\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 15:54:27 +0200

(As WG co-chair)

You will not from the agenda that we have a number of author drafts to
be discussed.

In general we will be looking as part of this discussion to identify if
there is work to be performed within the WG on this subject.

The drafts are:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-sip-rph-in-responses-00.t
xt

Updates a SIP standards track document. Note that IEPREP are now out of
the requirements loop on this subject.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-sip-rph-new-namespaces-01
.txt

Prime function is the registration of new namespaces in the IANA
registry. The requirements for adding to this registry are: "A new
namespace MUST be defined in a Standards Track RFC, following the
'Standards Action' policy in [RFC2434]". The proposal is to take this
action using a SIP WG item.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-camarillo-sip-body-handling-01
.txt

An attempt to plug the underspecification of message body handling that
should have been in RFC 3261.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-munakata-sip-privacy-new-01.tx
t

A replacement privacy mechanism for RFC 3323.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gurbani-sip-domain-certs-06.tx
t

Security document therefore requirements work is done in SIP.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dotson-sip-certificate-auth-03
.txt

Security document therefore requirements work is done in SIP.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-burger-sip-info-00

An attempt to provider a sounder basis for INFO usage, and therefore an
reference point for questions that keep coming back to the SIP list.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wing-sip-identity-media-00.txt

Security document therefore requirements work is done in SIP.

Independently of what appears in the slides we will be looking for the
answers to two questions for each of these drafts:

Is there support for a body of work in this area?
-------------------------------------------------

To answer this question it is suggested that you primarily study the
abstract for the draft, and if necessary seek clarification on the list
or at the microphone in the meeting. Instead of this abstract, you may
wish to suggest some alternative scope for adoption. At this point we
don't necessarily need to decide whether the work is standards track,
BCP or informational although that will form a part of the discussions
the ADs and the chairs have in setting milestones. Note that answering
YES to this also expresses an intention within the WG to provide
resources to work on and review this draft (therefore do not answer
"YES" if you just consider it mostly harmless.

There are three answers to this question:

YES
NO
NEEDS FURTHER WORK BEFORE WE DECIDE

A yes result means that the chairs will discuss with the ADs whether it
is appropriate to set new milestones for this work and what they should
be, taking into account the discussion made. We will also proceed to the
second question.

Does the document currently provided constitute a baseline draft for the
identified work?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------

What the WG is looking for here is whether the document, or its next
revision, could (subject to the agreement of the milestones with the AD)
become a draft-ietf-sip-xxxx document. This doesn't mean it has to be
perfect, merely that this is a better starting point to the work than
some other draft that may exist or that someone intends to produce.

Again there are three answers to this question:

YES
NO
NEEDS FURTHER WORK BEFORE WE DECIDE

It is entirely appropriate to hold discussions on the list to formulate
your opinions to answer the above questions. Expressions of support are
also appropriate. Note that we may not proceed to the questions on all
these drafts if it becomes apparent from list discussion or discussion
at the mic that the answer will not be "YES".

Requests for clarification on any of the above are welcome.

Regards

Keith

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