Subject: Re: [Enum] Re: Last Call: 'Voice Messaging Directory Service' to Proposed Standard

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 11:39:48 -0500

At 10:53 AM 2/3/2005, Stastny Richard wrote:

>Related to the current discussion at the enum list I am not sure if
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt 
><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt>
>
>is ready for last call. It defines enumservices and has not been
>discussed yet in the enum WG at all.

Copies of this ID announcement have been cross posted to the ENUM WG from 
time to time. And as ENUM WG co-chair I've made numerous presentations to 
the VPIM WG.

The process defined in RFC 3761 never the intended that the ENUM WG review 
all enumservices registrations from other Working Groups.

________________________

>Von: [email-masked] im Auftrag von The IESG
>Gesendet: Do 03.02.2005 16:07
>An: IETF-Announce
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Betreff: Last Call: 'Voice Messaging Directory Service' to Proposed Standard
>
>
>
>The IESG has received a request from the Voice Profile for Internet Mail WG to
>consider the following documents:
>
>- 'Voice Messaging Directory Service '
>    <draft-ietf-vpim-vpimdir-09.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>- 'Voice Message Routing Service '
>    <draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>
>The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
>[email-masked] or [email-masked] mailing lists by 2005-02-17.
>
>The files can be obtained via
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-vpimdir-09.txt
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt
>
>
>__________

Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza  -   Sterling, VA  20166
sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org   sip:[email-masked]
ENUM +87810-13313-31331
PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683,  Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz>
<http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

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

---

From: Clint Chaplin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 11:56:28 -0800

http://www.startribune.com/stories/368/5217727.html

-- 
Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin
Wireless Security Technologist
Wireless Standards Lead

---

From: Rob Evans <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 12:17:38 +0000

Maybe the story that URL points to is not the one you intended, or I
am missing something here, or misinterpreting.  In which case I
apologise in advance.

> http://www.startribune.com/stories/368/5217727.html

So the trains have to slow down for a minute or two.  Your point is?

Why has it become the in-thing to find any little niggle against the
places the meetings are being arranged in?  An exceptional summer two
years ago in Paris, a small leak in a tunnel.  The fact that some
places are in the US.  The fact that others aren't.

I'm not in the US, but if IETF meetings were to cycle between Salt
Lake City, Minneapolis and some other place for the rest of time it
wouldn't bother me too much.  Given how many people find it difficult
to leave the hotel for the week of the meeting, I'm suprised anybody
really cares where the meetings actually are.

I'd like to thank Foretec and the secretariat for all the work that
goes into the meetings.  It must be tough trying to keep even some of
us happy some of the time. :-)

Regards,
Rob