You got it exactly backwards. There will not be a SIP-specific conferencing WG. There was however a lot of interest in a non-SIP-specific conferencing WG. If you don't like the current XCON charter text, then propose some alternate wording for a non-SIP-specific conferencing WG. Otherwise forever hold your peace.
thanks, -rohan
On Thursday, August 21, 2003, at 11:19 AM, Marshall Rose wrote:
As for Marshall's comments: there is certainly nothing nefarious about
having a large body of source work when trying to start a Working Group
(I cite XMPP as a recent example). What is important is for folks to
focus on the *charter text* and the desired output, rather than make
assumptions about the intent of those contributors.
and, as has been repeatedly pointed out, the text in the proposed charter is rather poor. we now have four sets of people with entirely different interpretations (some from the SIP camp, some from the XMPP camp, plus the IETF chair).
Marshall, if there is something specific that you don't like about the charter as a generic conferencing working group, please propose alternate rewording.
that's easy:
1,$s/conferencing/SIP-based conferencing/g
/mtr