Subject: RE: [XCON] framework-01, 7.3

From: "Chris Boulton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:09:32 +0100

Henning,

	The ultimate intention of this section is to detail the chosen
mechanism for the Framework.  The text that currently exists there is
only temporary until the decision is made and was meant to provide info
and stimulate discussion - it will then be replaced with appropriate
text relating to 'the chosen one'.  We can certainly remove text if
required and leave a placeholder if it is deemed necessary.

Chris.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Henning Schulzrinne
Sent: 22 September 2005 02:23
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [XCON] framework-01, 7.3

Given the audience of the document, I would drop Section 7.3  
(Conference Control Protocol). Once the protocol has been decided on,  
it would only be of historical interest and would be more likely to  
confuse implementors that would go hunting for long-expired I-Ds and  
faint echos of these protocols in dusty mailing list archives.

Henning

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

Information contained in this e-mail and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee only, and may contain confidential information of Ubiquity Software Corporation.  All unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the addressee, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this email.  Unless otherwise expressly agreed in writing signed by an officer of Ubiquity Software Corporation, nothing in this communication shall be deemed to be legally binding.  Thank you.

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

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 12:59:48 -0400

Chris,

I guess this raises the issue of timing. My assumption, given the 
informal "last call", was that this document would be headed out the WG 
door within a few weeks, i.e., well before a decision on the conference 
control protocol(s) is likely to have been made, let alone its design 
has been finalized and vetted.

At least from my limited experience with framework documents, such as 
the one in the NSIS WG, these documents are finished before the protocol 
  design. If this is meant more of a "document roadmap" or "IETF 
centralized conferencing architecture", we should probably wait with a 
final review until almost all of the details have been worked out.

Henning