Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22.txt> (Using the SDP Offer/Answer Mechanism for DTLS) to Proposed Standard

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

 



Hi,

I will change it to the IESG address :)

Regards,

Christer

On 17/03/17 17:23, "Ben Campbell" <ben@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>(as an individual)
>
>I recognize we have not been consistent, but I also favor using the IESG
>address for this sort of thing. It's one of the least ephemeral contacts
>we have. Individuals change addresses and responsibilities. Some people
>use WG lists, but we have more than one WG list kept open way beyond its
>otherwise useful life because of registrations that pointed to it.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Ben.
>
>On 17 Mar 2017, at 10:09, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> Personally I don¹t have a strong preference, but there are a number
>> of
>> similar RFCs where the author is listed. A 30 second search gives me
>> RFC
>> 4853, RFC 4574Š
>>
>> In another RFC (sorry, I closed the browser tab and forgot the number)
>> the
>> WG chair mail address was listed.
>>
>> So, it seems like there is no strict rule.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>>
>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>





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