RE: Impending publication: draft-iab-considerations-02.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I wanted to make a quick comment about some text in section
12.1 of the draft cited below.

  "In addition, there are extensions of SIP which
   are under consideration in these [external] standardization bodies
   that are not appropriate material for IETF, because they are not
   generally applicable but only relate to the particular application
   of SIP being developed by the standardization bodies. An example
   is particular interactions with accounting and billing for mobile
   telephony."

I believe this is a slight misrepresentation of the policy that has
been communicated by the transport area directors to the working group
and other standards bodies. In particular, the document cited as
[BMMWRO02] makes some particularly strong statements that all deployed
SIP extensions are to involve the IETF in some fashion. For example:
"All changes or extensions to SIP must first exist as SIP Working Group
documents," and "With the exception of "P-" headers described in Section
4.1, all SIP extensions must be standards track and must be developed
in the IETF."

On the topic of "P-" headers, however, there is still guidance that
such extensions require, at a minimum, publication as an RFC:

  "[A]ny P-header used outside of a very restricted research or teaching
   environment (such as a student lab on implementing extensions) MUST
   meet those requirements and MUST be documented in an RFC and be IANA
   registered."

While the text that appears in section 12.1 of draft-iab-considerations-02
does not directly contradict any of these statements, it does give the
impression that such external standards bodies are free to create SIP
extensions without any contact with the IETF. I beleive that additional
text to clarify that such extensions still require IETF involvement would
clear matters up sufficiently. I propose adding a sentance to the final
paragraph of section 12.1 along the lines of: "In the interest of
preserving the integrity of the protocol, however, such externally
developed extensions are still reviewed and published by the IETF."

/a

(Adam Roach, dynamicsoft)


-----Original Message-----
From: Leslie Daigle [mailto:leslie@thinkingcat.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 17:34
Subject: Impending publication: draft-iab-considerations-02.txt


The IAB is ready to ask the IESG to publish

            General Architectural and Policy Considerations
                 draft-iab-considerations-02.txt

as an Informational RFC.  This document is part survey of issues,
and part advice for IETF protocol development.  The IAB would
like to ensure that the IETF community has had an opportunity to
read it and comment before its publication.

The IAB solicits comments by September 20, 2002.  Please send 
comments to the IAB (iab@iab.org), care of the document editor 
(floyd@icir.org), or to ietf@ietf.org.  The document can be 
found at 

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-considerations-02.txt


Leslie Daigle
For the IAB


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]