[stir] Fwd: Re: [dispatch] Discussion venue for 666 (was SHAKEN but not STIRred means 666 can cause collateral damage)

Reply-all betrayed me. Forwarding for completeness.

Sorry for the extra noise.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [dispatch] Discussion venue for 666 (was SHAKEN but not 
STIRred means 666 can cause collateral damage)
Date: 	Thu, 17 Nov 2016 17:51:52 +0900
From: 	Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
To: 	dispatch@ietf.org

[as a STIR co-chair]

I agree with this.

Later in the discussion, I expect we will recommend splitting the
passport extension work out and running that through STIR, but that
doesn't need to happen immediately.

If we discover that there's frequent unnatural tension in needing to
talk about stir things while figuring out the SIP mechanics in these
drafts, we can revisit.

RjS

On 11/17/16 5:27 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> [as SIPCORE chair]
>
> On 11/17/16 10:14, Brian Rosen wrote:
>> I’ve sent this to stir, even though it has not been decided where the
>> 666 draft will land
>
> My understanding coming out of DISPATCH is that 666 is appropriate for
> SIPCORE, assuming the new charter is approved by the IESG. I expect
> the proposed charter changes to be uncontroversial.
>
> Based on the foregoing, we (the SIPCORE chairs) think it would be
> appropriate to hold general discussion of both of the
> draft-schulzrinne-dispatch-callinfo-spam and
> draft-schulzrinne-dispatch-status-unwanted documents on the SIPCORE list.
>
> I've copied DISPATCH and SIPCORE on this message, and set followups to
> SIPCORE.
>
> /a
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch