[Iptel] Updated version of iptel-tel-reg
"Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com> Tue, 25 March 2008 21:50 UTC
Return-Path: <iptel-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-iptel-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-iptel-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F266928C5FC; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.691
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.691 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.254, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 GfOFyyxfmWLA; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BAE28C529; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: iptel@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iptel@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B9DF28C429 for <iptel@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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 R3pZb21aDhJd for <iptel@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 078D73A69BE for <iptel@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ihmail.ih.lucent.com (h135-1-218-70.lucent.com [135.1.218.70]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id m2PLlu1s015683; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:47:56 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [135.185.244.90] (il0015vkg1.ih.lucent.com [135.185.244.90]) by ihmail.ih.lucent.com (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m2PLluA06063; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:47:56 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <47E9730C.1060709@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:47:56 -0500
From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>
Organization: Bell Labs Security Technology Research Group
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IETF IPTEL WG <iptel@ietf.org>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37
Subject: [Iptel] Updated version of iptel-tel-reg
X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Telephony <iptel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/iptel>
List-Post: <mailto:iptel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: iptel-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org
Folks: For those of you who have been waiting patiently for the tel URI registry to get established, the wait is over ;-) Those of you who have been waiting even patiently for iptel to close down, the wait is also over ;-) I think Cullen and I will share the dubious distinction of producing the last RFC in iptel WG -- iptel-tel-reg. The -05 version of iptel-tel-reg has been released. I believe that this version accurately encapsulates the debate that ensued between "Standards Action" and "Specification Required, Designated Expert". As per the instructions from Jon, I have updated S4.2 to include the latter policy, along with some criteria to consider when expert reviewing a tel URI parameter. I have included various comments Jon pointed out during his AD review of this draft (11 months ago!), including changing the phrase "accompanying RFC" to "accompanying RFC or other permanent and readily available public specification" to reflect the designation of "Specification Required." The new draft is available at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-reg-05.txt and a diff between -04 and -05 is at: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-reg-04.txt&url2=http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-reg-05.txt Please let me know if there are any additional comments. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent 2701 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9F-546, Lisle, Illinois 60532 (USA) Email: vkg@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org} WWW: http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/bell-labs _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel
- [Iptel] Updated version of iptel-tel-reg Vijay K. Gurbani