Re: [dispatch] Prorgessing draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-02

Hi all

Sure. I am updating the I-D with the comments and modifying the
applicability statement to reflect that it is specific to IMS. Will
submit the updated (-03) version of the I-D and then take it forward
with Option-2 as suggested by Camarillo.

Thanks 

Regards
Ranjit

-----Original Message-----
From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 10:24 PM
To: Paul Kyzivat
Cc: Mary Barnes; DISPATCH
Subject: Re: [dispatch]Prorgessing
draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-02

I think that is a given and if that is the way to go, I'm sure we'll all
make sure the words on the front cover go that way.

But there seemed to be some prior responses trying to take potential use
cases beyond that, and I wanted to make sure that if they existed, they
were explicitly declared.

regards

Keith 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 3:57 PM
> To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo; DISPATCH; Mary Barnes
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] Prorgessing
> draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-02
> 
> I don't have a problem with it being IMS-specific.
> I just want it to *say* that it is IMS-specific.
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> 
> DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> > At the moment, I think those of us looking at this from the
> 3GPP way of doing things do not see a more general application of 
> this.
> > 
> > I do not have a problem with doing it more generally, but I
> guess the people who see a clear use case for that need to speak up 
> and identify their use cases.
> > 
> > Otherwise we end up designing a general event package that
> no one else ever uses. As opposed to the alternative of clearly 
> stating the restricted use to a particular applicability, approving 
> it, and moving on to something else with our restricted amount of 
> resources.
> > 
> > regards
> > 
> > Keith
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org
> >> [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gonzalo Camarillo
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 9:16 AM
> >> To: DISPATCH
> >> Cc: Mary Barnes
> >> Subject: [dispatch] Prorgessing
> >> draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-02
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> there have been a set of messages on the list providing
> comments on
> >> the draft below:
> >>
> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-n
> >> otification-02
> >>
> >> As you know, the process for defining SIP event packages is 
> >> documented here:
> >>
> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peterson-rai-rfc3427bis-04#se
> >> ction-4.1
> >>
> >> Based on the feedback received, the authors need to decide whether 
> >> they want to generalize their solution so that is is generally 
> >> applicable to the public Internet or if they want to (further) 
> >> clarify that this mechanism is intended to work only in
> IMS networks
> >> that provide a CDIV service.
> >>
> >> If the authors choose the latter approach, we (the DISPATCH
> >> chairs) will choose a "Designated Expert" who will check the draft 
> >> against the 7 points described in the document above.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Gonzalo
> >> DISPATCH co-chair
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> dispatch mailing list
> >> dispatch@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > dispatch mailing list
> > dispatch@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
> > 
> 
_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch