Re: [Enum] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-enum-msg-02.txt

"Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP)" <lwc@roke.co.uk> Wed, 30 June 2004 13:21 UTC

From: "Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP)" <lwc@roke.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:21:27 -0400
To: "Russell, Nick, VF UK - Technology (TS)" <"Nick.Russell at vodafone.com">
Subject: Re: [Enum] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-enum-msg-02.txt
In-Reply-To: <6FC554FA1F33BE4C9AC844FC3B3B7128010E1665@UKWMXM01>
Message-ID: <47FF20EE-CA97-11D8-81C7-000393A70BB2@roke.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Status: R

On 30 Jun 2004, at 12:13, Russell, Nick, VF UK - Technology (TS) wrote:
Dear All,
Just a quick question from a newbie on this list on section 4 "Fax
Service Registration" of the below draft. Why is the "tel:" URI 
proposed
to be used not the "fax:" URI as the "URI Scheme"? Are "fax:" URIs 
being
discontinued (draft-ietf-iptel-rfc2806bis-09 seems to hint at this)?

Thanks,
Nick
Yes.
the update to RFC2806 does not include them, so they're, in effect, 
deprecated.

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum