Re: [bfcpbis] Documentation conclusions

Tom Kristensen <2mkristensen@gmail.com> Tue, 06 March 2012 08:56 UTC

Return-Path: <2mkristensen@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37B6621F885C for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:56:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z5d0zGoL3F-B for <bfcpbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:56:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9D121F885B for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:56:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by obbta4 with SMTP id ta4so3722190obb.31 for <bfcpbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:56:51 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of 2mkristensen@gmail.com designates 10.60.20.163 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.60.20.163;
Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of 2mkristensen@gmail.com designates 10.60.20.163 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=2mkristensen@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=2mkristensen@gmail.com
Received: from mr.google.com ([10.60.20.163]) by 10.60.20.163 with SMTP id o3mr8968315oee.55.1331024211896 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:56:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=cl5TJZ1WsssvrqWgM5M/0Wy7gkWrKqqAhnsCVDxJmCU=; b=Fvb7zGxXzrpWoK8u9SBtlS10MDrX0RKzVsrpAXwThnqcbHAapWBK8M0Qx9XV2S8WGM GncW3KHTuFemz5CJu2GBFM5uk6uhXvLSoKazhlZtTRnILLlNvkFU5c9Y4L22/+/9Dggc o4J9GKMEsFb9YeJJr2AehVOb8Id67NKcmBVtjHxXX1eCc7z7h/3FRhDA94X4aAqs2fJ4 xrRAOZNktSfHn6GIJEpgEjJUkoHwJfjXcJqkJi+sOGIa+SwUJKJ4M3pFb8QLTTapHYqE Ld8nP1e5RA8PMClfqBMtQb/SHHsVEsqGn2oMJEZjWMd9y0GoWmMuqUdST6xK5nzh0Zbl TfRA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.20.163 with SMTP id o3mr7843902oee.55.1331024211818; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:56:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.182.185.77 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:56:51 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE224AE9A32@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE224AE9A32@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 09:56:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFHv=r8degk0COgWAudck_A5S_80-iMChsVpahUkZFDRs6rGOg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Kristensen <2mkristensen@gmail.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "bfcpbis@ietf.org" <bfcpbis@ietf.org>, Tom Kristensen <tomkrist@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] Documentation conclusions
X-BeenThere: bfcpbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: BFCPBIS working group discussion list <bfcpbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bfcpbis>
List-Post: <mailto:bfcpbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bfcpbis>, <mailto:bfcpbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 08:56:53 -0000

On 21/02/2012, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> (As WG cochair)
>
> We opened a discussion earlier in the year about the documentation of the
> 4582bis document (and what we needed to do with the 4583bis issues as well).
>
> There was a limited response on list which went in one particular direction,
> and the interim meeting (today) essentially agreed with that view.
>
> I'd therefore like to confirm that decision on list with responses requested
> by close of business Monday 27th February.

I've seen no objections to the decision from the interim meeting on
list. Both RFC4582bis and RFC4583bis are being structured and
"patched" according to these decisions.

Therefore, draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-00 was submitted yesterday (a
couple of hours before the cut-off time for initial document
submission). We'll finish the next version of
draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4582bis during this week.

-- Tom

[...]

-- 
# Cisco                         |  http://www.cisco.com/telepresence/
## tomkrist@cisco.com  |  http://www.tandberg.com
###                               |  http://folk.uio.no/tomkri/