Keith, Gonzalo and I did synch up with Alan and Cullen after the meeting to resolve the debate we (chairs) were having at the end of the discussion, as I realize we (I) did introduce some confusion on the way forward. The proposal is that this doc would go through WGLC in SIPPING (there was a hum for support of progressing this doc during the session) - pending Jon's approval of a new milestone. Progression of the document would be in the form of the problem statement and requirements only (as Informational). SIP WG would work from the requirements to develop/complete the solution - again pending agreement in SIP WG. The plan is to do a pre-WGLC of the document in SIPPING to determine readiness ASAP. At this point, there were no concerns (on the requirements) raised in the meeting, so folks should raise any ASAP. Regards, Mary. Note: I've snipped the "to"s and "cc"s, adding Alan and Jon and also snipped the thread, as it was getting quite long. -----Original Message----- From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith) Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 2:28 PM To: Henry Sinnreich; Joanne McMillen; Paul Kyzivat; Cullen Jennings; Laura Liess Cc: sipping; Huelsemann,Martin Subject: Re: draft-johnston-sipping-cc-uui-05 To publish as informational under the current IANA registration procedures would mean that the solution would need to be downgraded to a P-header, and the option tag would need to be removed. The option tag is there to meet one of the ISDN interworking requirements, as it is possible to say in DSS1 that the call should only proceed in the UUI is understood - i.e. interworking capability will be lost. Do others share Henry's view, or should this document ultimately proceed in SIP as a standards track document, with the proposed new header field and option tag. regards Keith _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
