IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MMUSIC] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-37: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Wed, 07 August 2019 18:53 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B1F8120666; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.68
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.68 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BoQCJUnhDZ_G; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:53:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB9FB120275; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:53:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Orochi.local (c-24-9-76-58.hsd1.co.comcast.net [24.9.76.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x77Ir0JQ068700 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:53:02 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1565203984; bh=41jc8vGX0EnvYdxjNCxGH4r7bDANr/mk1WaITCYKNqw=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=AzLzY4pakfeS7ogMfFqnVXd9lcmVd1h61lAseqRZb2PmHcJESss1BmATZU+EJc1UR JySOi19xgdwH3KV+quGYDRVCgDMN1WYFEtB/oT1WRqHCEo0bgOMLBcwTHaH3yoArp9 QSpbIoLKxToVumH1luq2QBGkcjmvcA1AcsxFnlMw=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host c-24-9-76-58.hsd1.co.comcast.net [24.9.76.58] claimed to be Orochi.local
To: Flemming Andreasen <fandreas@cisco.com>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: "draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp@ietf.org>, "mmusic-chairs@ietf.org" <mmusic-chairs@ietf.org>, "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, "jdrosen@jdrosen.net" <jdrosen@jdrosen.net>, "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org>
References: <156502552845.24515.11157901358870690278.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <HE1PR07MB31613F486F6B67B1A1F0453093DA0@HE1PR07MB3161.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <747b0dc1-5a12-3751-c82b-20a03d14015a@cisco.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <b5abdd85-05b9-01e2-8988-cacd79ae1003@nostrum.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 13:52:55 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <747b0dc1-5a12-3751-c82b-20a03d14015a@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/OpUuSTJFlk_VTdOIqXMpQxmp7qo>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-37: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 18:53:12 -0000

On 8/7/19 07:48, Flemming Andreasen wrote:
>
>
> On 8/5/19 2:44 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>> Hi Mirja,
>>
>> Thank You for the review! Please see inline.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>> 1) First I have a processing question for the IESG (and maybe the RFC editor) but it might be just me not knowing this:
>>> As I understand it, RFC5245 was spilt up into RFC8445 and this document, however, I find it a bot odd that both documenst
>>> obsolete RFC5245. Is that what we usually do? Did we have this case before? Is that the right thing to do?
>> That's a good question. I hope the chairs and/or the AD can give some guidance.
>>
> I'm not sure either. Maybe Adam knows ? 


I don't think there's any issue with the situation. I've copied Heather 
to see if she sees any issues with two documents obsoleting the same one.

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email