IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] PROPOSED CHARTER FOR ASAP (Automatic SIP trunking And Peering)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 06 January 2020 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED7B1200FB; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 10:12:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.4, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PLp-c8ZHU8fk; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 10:12:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A07C120982; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 10:11:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Svantevit.local (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 006IBVjX008865 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Jan 2020 12:11:34 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1578334295; bh=315VgqjZ8sr6b0OeQvjKKzGlAagOKu5RK1l/3RG13Dc=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=V+apcTsekVt1XA7/jQePN2JRydC0PyuR8ECaZMt0Izweg1W7mW7WEVxGmPJeGl+96 NaApEbmF75QXVTA/cBEPFzWk0HoXKR5kOui+nIfTpeQYbVuBn3yRszRAA0IqY+0F8B W8EfOWTvdXsw3LyRIgTiYus3/lfbNPVlGltSKTB4=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.local
To: "Kaustubh Inamdar (kinamdar)" <kinamdar@cisco.com>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>, "dispatch-chairs@ietf.org" <dispatch-chairs@ietf.org>
References: <8B4A804A-102E-4877-8C21-BF667B19BAFA@cisco.com> <085E1A7A-5EDE-4666-BE01-574DDBC9049E@cisco.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <6a8f2041-8f31-d5bc-9de7-651d799c217f@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 12:11:26 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <085E1A7A-5EDE-4666-BE01-574DDBC9049E@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------902E21FAE1FC104BE4E4423D"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/6CIXeib-tkf4HHMxktB5i0wQLlQ>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] PROPOSED CHARTER FOR ASAP (Automatic SIP trunking And Peering)
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 18:12:05 -0000

On 1/5/20 11:17 PM, Kaustubh Inamdar (kinamdar) wrote:
>
> The group will produce
>
> ·Requirements, Use Cases and Architecture draft.
>
> ·Specification for SIP Auto Peer.
>
> This workgroup will co-ordinate with the SIP Core workgroup and the 
> SIPConnect efforts carried out by the SIP Forum.
>
> Milestones:
>
> <Date TBD> Send architecture draft to IESG
>
> <Date TBD> Send protocol specification draft to IESG
>

A quick comment on the first milestone -- while this is probably a 
worthwhile document to develop inside the working group to ensure that 
the solution does what it sets out to do, it may not make sense to send 
it to the IESG for publication. Read and consider the text at 
<https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/support-documents/>; if 
you still believe that the architecture document needs to be published 
as an RFC, please explain why as part of the charter.

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email