Since this document is going to be standards-track, I think the contact for the dtls-id registration should be the IESG instead of the author. Russ > On Mar 17, 2017, at 9:18 AM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The IESG has received a request from the Multiparty Multimedia Session > Control WG (mmusic) to consider the following document: > - 'Using the SDP Offer/Answer Mechanism for DTLS' > <draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22.txt> as Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2017-04-06. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This document defines the SDP offer/answer procedures for negotiating > and establishing a DTLS association. The document also defines the > criteria for when a new DTLS association must be established. The > document updates RFC 5763 and RFC 7345, by replacing common SDP > offer/answer procedures with a reference to this specification. > > This document defines a new SDP media-level attribute, 'dtls-id'. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp/ballot/ > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > >