Re: [Sframe] Adoption call for draft-omara-sframe-01

I support adopting this draft.

Bernard is correct to point out that it needs some polishing, but that's
what we do in a WG.  Even with the rough edges, it captures the core of
what we want to get to.  In other words, the core technical bits around how
to do the actual framing and encryption are largely right, we just need to
put them in the right context.  And now that we've had a couple of rounds
of SDP/RTP conversation (with a few more to go), it seems like we have a
pretty good idea of where the cut lines should be, so I have confidence
that the WG will be able to come to consensus.

--Richard

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 4:38 AM Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saghul@jitsi.org>
wrote:

> On 11/10/2021 01:35, Martin Thomson wrote:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-omara-sframe-01
> >
> > Please respond to this email before AOE 31 October 2021 if you support
> adopting draft-omara-sframe (currently -01) as a working group item.  If
> you would prefer we not adopt this work, please respond with an explanation
> of why and ideally what you would like to see addressed before we do that.
> >
> > We're running this a tiny bit longer than a typical adoption call.  Last
> time we talked about adoption there were a few concerns raised about the
> draft.  We want to make sure those concerns are addressed, or at least
> those with concerns are satisfied that their concerns could be addressed.
> >
> > Martin, for the chairs
> >
>
> I do support (speaking for Jitsi here) the adoption of the draft.
>
> Quick question though: any reason why -01 and not the latest version?
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Saúl
>
> --
> Sframe mailing list
> Sframe@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sframe
>