Re: [martini] Updated OLIVE and VERMOUTH documents

Hadriel Kaplan <> Fri, 29 October 2010 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4287E3A69E3 for <>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.466
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.466 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.132, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YhMnakX0J8E6 for <>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4E13A69DE for <>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:10:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:12:36 -0400
Received: from ([]) by mail ([]) with mapi; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:12:36 -0400
From: Hadriel Kaplan <>
To: Bernard Aboba <>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:12:34 -0400
Thread-Topic: [martini] Updated OLIVE and VERMOUTH documents
Thread-Index: Act3lNybLZHUJR+nRuOXoJIXkYHuUg==
Message-ID: <>
References: <BLU104-DS500D69625B1913B8F9FB693450@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU104-DS500D69625B1913B8F9FB693450@phx.gbl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_859F455966094E3C9786B3FAE6BF428Facmepacketcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [martini] Updated OLIVE and VERMOUTH documents
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of en-mass SIP PBX registration mechanisms <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:10:46 -0000

Thanks for hosting these Bernard.

With regards to Olive:
The consensus from the last meeting in Maastricht was to split it out into two separate drafts: one on local numbers and one on email-style AoRs.  Olive is now just the local numbers part, and a separate draft will be submitted for email-style ones when the submission tool re-opens. (the draft is already done but it makes no real changes from the previous Olive other than just being only about email-style AoRs)

With regards to Vermouth:
The consensus form the last meeting in Maastricht was to define a new event package instead of hacking reg-event, and the general feedback was for the new event package to be for the list of provisioned numbers/names, without registration status and such.  Therefore, the updated Vermouth draft is a straw-man towards that model.  It is NOT a complete proposal, because I think this actually requires a small design team or at least serious discussion of exactly what needs to be in the XML doc and what its structure and semantics should be.  I will send an email to start a new thread on that topic.


On Oct 29, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:

At IETF 79, Hadriel will be presenting the OLIVE and VERMOUTH documents.

Through a quirk in the system, updated versions of the document were submitted on time but not confirmed, so that they are not currently on the archive.

Instead, they can be obtained here: