[Sip] Re: [RAI] RAI review of draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-03

The document includes any normative sip extension once it has been 
adopted as a WG Item. So this does include stuff that is "earlier" in 
the process; for example the sip-saml stuff which (IMHO) is still a 
little on the early side. But once it is a wg item it gets in there. I 
still think its fine to publish hitchhikers as an RFC with those as 
references (to drafts).

-Jonathan R.

Francois Audet wrote:
> Same here. I prefer the whole list.
> 
> I checked again the list in the current document, and I didn't see
> anything that was "controversial" (i.e., all the drafts quoted are
> mature working group items).
> 
> If some of them were considered immature, we should remove them. But
> otherwise, I'd rather we keep them in. 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stucker, Brian (RICH1:AR00) 
>> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 07:58
>> To: Jonathan Rosenberg; Audet, Francois (SC100:3055)
>> Cc: sip@ietf.org; Avshalom Houri; rai@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: [RAI] RAI review of draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-03
>>
>> I would also prefer that I-D references be left in the 
>> document. It's very helpful to the community to not only know 
>> where SIP is at when you read the guide, but to know where 
>> it's headed. If for no other reason than it prevents someone 
>> from thinking they've discovered a novel problem and go off 
>> implementing a solution parallel to what will soon 
>> (hopefully) be an RFC. Likewise, if they find that the I-D is 
>> incomplete, it gives them a reference to make comments 
>> against that they may not have otherwise discovered.
>>
>> It's an informative document. What if we just copy paragraphs 
>> two and three of from the boilerplate "status of this memo" 
>> into the introduction as a warning to those who read the 
>> document later as an RFC that I-D's referenced by the guide 
>> can change. 
>>
>> Is there any harm in doing this?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Brian 
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:jdrosen@cisco.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:36 AM
>>> To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055)
>>> Cc: sip@ietf.org; Avshalom Houri; rai@ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [RAI] RAI review of draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-03
>>>
>>> inline:
>>>
>>> Francois Audet wrote:
>>>> What about SIPS, which is already in hitchiker's guide, and
>>> which is
>>>> waiting on outbound because of a normative reference?
>>>>
>>>>     
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------
>>>>     *From:* DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:drage@alcatel-lucent.com]
>>>>     *Sent:* Tuesday, October 30, 2007 01:01
>>>>     *To:* Avshalom Houri; rai@ietf.org; sip@ietf.org;
>>> jdrosen@cisco.com
>>>>     *Subject:* RE: [RAI] RAI review of
>>>> draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-03
>>>>
>>>>     (As WG chair)
>>>>      
>>>>     Just a note that I should have included with the WGLC.
>>>>      
>>>>     The intention with this document is to republish on a 
>> recurring
>>>>     basis, and therefore to keep it up to date (say once a
>>> year or so).
>>>>      
>>>>     The 1st versions is intended to include gruu, outbound
>>> and ice, but
>>>>     apart from that, anything that is not published in that
>>> timeframe
>>>>     will probably be removed unless there is exceptional
>>> justification
>>>>     for keeping it, with the idea that it will appear in
>>> the next version.
>>>
>>> This is news to me...
>>>
>>> What I thought would happen is that we have references to 
>> everything 
>>> in the guide, and when the guide appears as an RFC, whatever 
>>> references are at RFC status at that time, get RFC numbers. 
>> Everything 
>>> else is referenced as an I-D.
>>>
>>> I think you are suggesting that, instead, when we send this 
>> to IESG, 
>>> we remove any content and references associated with 
>> documents which 
>>> are not on track to publication around the same timeframe as 
>>> hitchhikers guide itself. Indeed it will require us to change those 
>>> references to normative in order to get rfc-editor to do a 
>> REF hold on 
>>> hitchhikers till its dependencies clear.
>>>
>>> If my interpretation is correct, my next question is whether this 
>>> applies to just the core specs or all of the specs.
>>>
>>> I personally would rather leave the document as is - include 
>>> everything, and recognize that some references will be 
>> drafts rather 
>>> than RFCs when hitchhikers is published. Next round of hitchhikers 
>>> will have more of them as RFCs.
>>>
>>> -Jonathan R.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
>>> Cisco Fellow                                   Parsippany, NJ 
>>> 07054-2711
>>> Cisco Systems
>>> jdrosen@cisco.com                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
>>> http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
>>> http://www.cisco.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RAI mailing list
>>> RAI@ietf.org
>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rai
>>>
> 

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow                                   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
jdrosen@cisco.com                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip