[Ecrit] New work in ECRIT

Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com> Tue, 03 August 2010 13:19 UTC

Return-Path: <mlinsner@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37033A67F5 for <ecrit@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 06:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DdrUhjSeoA-M for <ecrit@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 06:19:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B287F3A659B for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 06:19:24 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAF60V0xAZnwM/2dsb2JhbACgCnGnOZtThTkEiQI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,309,1278288000"; d="scan'208";a="142705012"
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Aug 2010 13:19:51 +0000
Received: from [10.116.195.119] (rtp-mlinsner-8716.cisco.com [10.116.195.119]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o73DJoNu009415 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 13:19:51 GMT
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.25.0.100505
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 09:19:50 -0400
From: Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com>
To: 'ecrit' <ecrit@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <C87D8FB6.2760A%mlinsner@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: New work in ECRIT
Thread-Index: AcszDo0Z7jRm4FMv+UqNT4Z3gBTsiw==
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Ecrit] New work in ECRIT
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:19:25 -0000

During the meeting last week the following drafts were discussed in the
context of accepting them as WG items.

draft-rosen-ecrit-additional-data
draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-psap-callback
draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-unauthenticated-access
draft-tschofenig-ecrit-trustworthy-location
draft-rosen-ecrit-data-only-ea

The chairs and ADs have reviewed the level of interest in these, compared
the work to the current charter and believe these fit within the scope of
ECRIT.

We asked during the meeting if anyone objects to accepting any or all of
these drafts as WG items.  So, now, we're asking on the list.

If you object to any of these drafts becoming WG items, please explain if
you think the work is something ECRIT should not do, or if you simply have
problems with current version of the particular draft.  No response is a
show of support for all of this work.

Once the above question is answered, the chairs will devise a work plan to
finish the accepted work.

Also discussed in the meeting was the priority order of getting these drafts
completed, and it was the general feeling that psap-callback,
unauthenticated-access, and trustworthy-location were the most difficult and
would take more time.  Of those three the general feeling was the
psap-callback was the highest priority.  If you have an opinion on which
draft should completed first, please send it to the list.

Please respond by COB on Wednesday, 8/11/2010 if you have objections to any
of this work, or you have strong feelings on the priority of the work.

Thanks,

-Marc, Richard, Roger-