Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes

Bernie Hoeneisen <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch> Thu, 14 April 2011 12:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2084EE089A for <apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 05:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ICUlNPLwQrYv for <apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 05:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from softronics.hoeneisen.ch (softronics.hoeneisen.ch [62.2.86.178]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 272BDE068E for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 05:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by softronics.hoeneisen.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>) id 1QALg6-0000vK-VT; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:29:43 +0200
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:29:42 +0200 (CEST)
From: Bernie Hoeneisen <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>
X-X-Sender: bhoeneis@softronics.hoeneisen.ch
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimL1jn2__2wf7nMwsrPB3tAN90qKg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1104141414030.1653@softronics.hoeneisen.ch>
References: <4DA66102.4060200@stpeter.im> <BANLkTimL1jn2__2wf7nMwsrPB3tAN90qKg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on softronics.hoeneisen.ch); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:29:43 -0000

Hi Peter et al.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011, Barry Leiba wrote:

>> Bernie Hoeneisen:
>> IANA Registration of Enumservices for Internet Calendaring
>> Session chair: Look for experts on calendaring (small group) first.
>> Question: Why shut down ENUM and not work on that there?
>> Answer: Leadership wants wg to be shut down.
>
> More complete answer was that the WG is ending its useful life and is
> ready to be shut down, and that at this point this document is more a
> calendar issue than an enum issue, so there's little reason to do it
> in enum anyway.

Correct.

My I ask to adjust the minutes to emphasize the fact that the 
Caldenaring issues are the tricky ones (as the ENUM issues are trivial, 
once the Calendaring issues are resolved).

Proposal:

OLD:
   Question: Why shut down ENUM and not work on that there?
   Answer: Leadership wants WG to be shut down (outlived its useful
   life).

NEW:
   Question: Why shut down ENUM and not work on that there?
   Answer: IETF Leadership wants ENUM WG to be shut down (outlived its
   useful life). Furthermore, the issues with this document are in
   the Calendaring space (as opposed to ENUM).


cheers,
  Bernie

--

http://ucom.ch/
Tech Consulting for Internet Standardization