Re: [clue] Publishing CLUE protocol as Experimental?

This will have an impact on on-going work in the ITU-T.  The ITU-T
telepresence group chose to use CLUE directly instead of developing a
competing protocol, and they have several drafts which have been waiting
for the IETF publication for some years now.

They cannot make normative references to an experimental RFC.  They'd
either need to abandon their work, or directly incorporate CLUE into their
recommendations.

Stephen

On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 5:07 AM Simon Pietro Romano <spromano@unina.it>
wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> I’m perfectly fine with Benjamin’s and Ben’s proposal.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon
>
>                                   _\\|//_
>                                ( O-O )
>       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o00~~(_)~~00o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                      Simon Pietro Romano
>                Universita' di Napoli Federico II
>                       Computer Engineering Department
>              Phone: +39 081 7683823 -- Fax: +39 081 7683816
>                                            e-mail: spromano@unina.it
> <spromano@unina.it>
>
>     <<Molti mi dicono che lo scoraggiamento è l'alibi degli
>     idioti. Ci rifletto un istante; e mi scoraggio>>. Magritte.
>                                      oooO
>        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(   )~~~ Oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                  \ (            (   )
>                                   \_)          ) /
>                                                                        (_/
>
>
>
> Il giorno 22 dic 2018, alle ore 00:10, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> ha
> scritto:
>
> CLUE working group and document authors:
>
> During IESG evaluation, Benjamin and Ben raised some issues around the
> state machine design, timeouts, and interaction with the various SIP state
> machines. While these could probably be addressed by adding substantial new
> text and a handful of new states and supervisory timers to the CLUE state
> machines, as well as including additional detail about the interaction
> between such state machines and the SIP state machines, it's not clear to
> me that the CLUE working group has the kind of energy necessary for that
> kind of refinement at this point in its lifecycle.
>
> An alternate path that both Ben and Benjamin would be okay with is
> publication of the protocol mechanism as Experimental rather than Standards
> Track, in order to allow the collection of operational experience around
> implementing and deploying the protocol with the state machines as
> specified. This would be sufficient to satisfy their concerns around the
> currently-defined state machine and would allow publication of the CLUE
> documents. (Note that, due to the relationship between clue-protocol,
> clue-signaling, and clue-datachannel, this would also result in the
> publication of clue-signaling and clue-datachannel as experimental.)
>
> Recognizing that many people are out of the office during this time of
> year, I'd like to ask that anyone who has comments regarding the proposal
> to move the core CLUE documents to Experimental status respond before
> Friday, January 18th. Thanks.
>
> /a
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list
> clue@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>