Re: [Insipid] Timing for publishing draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id

[Atle Monrad <[e-mail]>]

James

This was discussed in the INSIPID session in Berlin under the agenda point:

- Update on draft-kaplan-session-id being published as Historic

I couldn't find the official minutes, but in this discussion the change from Historic -> Informational was clarified by Gonzalo and it was agreed to submit the draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id-03 as Informational which initiated the versions -00 to -03 of draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id by Hadriel over a few days. This is quite well reflected on the INSIPID list in emails by Hadriel, Keith and Mary.

As this draft reflects the background and history of the session ID, completing this draft will in my view help progress and document what exist e.g. in 3GPP.

If it is not possible to agree on a fully backwards compatible solution - unfortunate, but I cannot see making changes to history (draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id aka draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id) to be of any help. I rather think having a stable base will benefit specification of the INSIPID-solution.

Thanks
/atle

________________________________ 


Atle Monrad
3GPP CT Chairman

Group Function Technology - Standardization and Technical Regulation 
Ericsson



-----Original Message-----
From: James Polk [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: 11. september 2013 00:10
To: Atle Monrad; Gonzalo Camarillo; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Insipid] Timing for publishing draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id

Gonzalo

I, however, do not agree with draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id being published as an informational RFC before the INSIPID solution is published as a standards-track. Nor do I want this document IANA registering the SIP header Session-ID, such as it currently attempts to do. At best, they should be consecutive RFC numbers with the INSIPID solution number having the lower number. If that means the kaplan draft has to wait in the RFC-Editor queue for the solution draft - so be it. That's what Dan R. from his Gen-Art review stated as his first major issue with the kaplan draft. Robert Sparks backed that opinion up by agreeing with that (and the rest of Dan's review). 
Gonzalo Salgueiro, one of INSIPID's WG chairs, says he stated that same view in a previously sent email to this list.

INSIPID, from its inception, has had the charter item to IANA register this SIP header, and the draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id is not even a WG item, so why is everyone now in such a rush to have this draft do what a WG is supposed to do? Could it be the kaplan draft couldn't create a WG to form consensus on its own, so now folks are wanting to rush ahead of themselves to claim WG consensus where there wasn't any such consensus within any WG, let alone INSIPID?

James

At 11:39 AM 9/10/2013, Atle Monrad wrote:
>Gonzalo
>
>I understood from the discussions in IETF that publishing of 
>draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id was to document what had been 
>already been documented in draft-kaplan-dispatch-session-id.
>
>If this still is the case, I do not see why waiting will help.
>
>I'd support publishing  of draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id as soon 
>as possible.
>
>/atle
>
>________________________________
>
>
>Atle Monrad
>3GPP CT Chairman
>
>Group Function Technology - Standardization and Technical Regulation
>Ericsson
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On 
>Behalf Of Gonzalo Camarillo
>Sent: 10. september 2013 17:09
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [Insipid] Timing for publishing draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id
>
>Hi,
>
>as you know, the following draft has gone through an IETF LC and it 
>has gotten a few comments:
>
>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kaplan-insipid-session-id/
>
>Some of the concerns relate to the fact that we are publishing this 
>document before INSIPID produces a solution document, which will be 
>backwards compatible with the solution described in the draft above.
>
>My question to this group is: do we have a reason to publish this 
>draft before the INSIPID solution draft is ready?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Gonzalo
>_______________________________________________
>insipid mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid
>_______________________________________________
>insipid mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid