Re: [EME] the end of EME?

Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com> Wed, 30 January 2008 14:46 UTC

Return-path: <eme-bounces@irtf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKEDB-00039G-CH; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:46:49 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKED9-00038z-Ue for EME@irtf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:46:47 -0500
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKED9-0004rs-Lk for EME@irtf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:46:47 -0500
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2008 09:46:47 -0500
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0UEkkbF020952; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:46:46 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0UEkVJN022572; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:46:46 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-205.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.59]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:46:46 -0500
Received: from 10.86.115.68 ([10.86.115.68]) by xmb-rtp-205.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.59]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:46:45 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.3.061214
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:46:46 -0500
Subject: Re: [EME] the end of EME?
From: Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>
To: Tilman Wolf <wolf@ecs.umass.edu>, <EME@irtf.org>
Message-ID: <C3C5F806.321CD%mshore@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [EME] the end of EME?
Thread-Index: AchjTu+wLivuaM9CEdyrYwAKleNSdA==
In-Reply-To: <47A088FE.1010407@ecs.umass.edu>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2008 14:46:46.0236 (UTC) FILETIME=[EFD4D1C0:01C8634E]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=692; t=1201704406; x=1202568406; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=mshore@cisco.com; z=From:=20Melinda=20Shore=20<mshore@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[EME]=20the=20end=20of=20EME? |Sender:=20 |To:=20Tilman=20Wolf=20<wolf@ecs.umass.edu>,=20<EME@irtf.or g>; bh=75tnW2JlS62CmYU/kT7/7GdYNvrf3GezjzS3CeTSq0o=; b=q/If1SzWQ9AIhoTCJsFkzKItKSYQZ4H17iDrf3PFtyg3OBzQQAuVFzFEZg 9HJV3PHg6fcLLHjsPLtoTwRq+8YcZBDcg5buvn2xtz1ps3k/3FpWIv3ijolb HwEFdWpp/m;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=mshore@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370
Cc:
X-BeenThere: eme@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: end-middle-end research group <eme.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme>, <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/eme>
List-Post: <mailto:eme@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme>, <mailto:eme-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: eme-bounces@irtf.org

On 1/30/08 9:26 AM, "Tilman Wolf" <wolf@ecs.umass.edu>; wrote:
> After publishing 
> draft-irtf-eme-francis-nutss-design-00 last year and holding a good
> meeting at IETF-69 (jointly with HIPRG), activities have died down.

I'm not sure that things might not have gone differently if we
hadn't met with HIP, but there's no way to know for sure.

I think there's a broader question here, and that's the role of
signaling work in the IETF.  It's my general sense that neither
customers nor manufacturers like out-of-band signaling very
much, which suggests that in practice (for an engineering
organization) it's not going to be a very successful way
to solve problems.

Melinda


_______________________________________________
EME mailing list
EME@irtf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eme