Re: [tram] TRAM approved for IETF and external review/next steps

Oleg Moskalenko <mom040267@gmail.com> Fri, 07 February 2014 07:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mom040267@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3231A05BD for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 23:18:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 kew76OYuiW2A for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 23:18:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15E9E1A05B7 for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 23:18:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id rr13so2876567pbb.21 for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 23:18:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=kJl7vyZ51FZGMMCWaFIB8AlgSCc76xURFM9bwPIkWzg=; b=GZoj/AMXSqqsSznK1Jytnt2az3L1jpnRf0zK3mYYOUV4RMU7Aluk1MS/WXK195tTSJ iShAfpryEywIjq66mJ3GZwE+uEYT1jZAtZ4YbNnHXpoHIMzwKqaprXRSnGTkv309qa6N mzJFGUTZYZkYvLnrQcFepb5hbWN3rehCB2jdZmURQRay7UsfriLbIg2aWZ6bHS5T79Uf MlkErPYETZVD/OgEREc5ogcU9ANR1UYkHSRCfGt+w+iYsTIlaB2jOHCEoMwd19+IisQB h7bnpZzOvHlryf6QbpPSr2o6VlgNYOBWKu7PeacCWrkuqU7CPfToNqiPSTktOOkBeXBf NJtg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.195.4 with SMTP id ia4mr17807227pbc.142.1391757495909; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 23:18:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.147.131 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 23:18:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <52F40B7B.4000809@gmail.com>
References: <52F40B7B.4000809@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 23:18:15 -0800
Message-ID: <CALDtMrKnUQrQOTi+DjzQgbZhFe1J0gY4GGqdbnx8XJPJMfA82g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Oleg Moskalenko <mom040267@gmail.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b10cfbf2844ac04f1cbcb67"
Cc: Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tram] TRAM approved for IETF and external review/next steps
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussing the creation of a Turn Revised And Modernized \(TRAM\) WG, which goal is to consolidate the various initiatives to update TURN and STUN." <tram.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tram/>
List-Post: <mailto:tram@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 07:18:19 -0000

The wording is somewhat not clean:

"The work will include the addition of DTLS as an additional transport"

I'd change it to a cleaner version:

"The work will include the addition of DTLS as a new STUN transport"


Thanks



Oleg



On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Spencer Dawkins <
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear TRAMsters,
>
> I wanted to share this with you, from the *draft* telechat narrative
> minutes today:
>
>     4 Working Group Actions
>
> 4.1 WG Creation
> 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review
> . TURN Revised and Modernized (tram)
>    Token: Spencer Dawkins
>   Telechat::
>
>     Amy: Version -06 has no blocking comments, Hearing no objections, this
> is approved.
>     Amy: We will send an announcement to new-work, and put this on the
> agenda.
>
> So, here's what this means:
>
> The IESG and IAB have looked over the proposed charter (current text is at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-tram/) and they think it's
> plausible enough to ask the rest of the IETF for comments.
>
> We were able to work through concerns from Barry , (that you've seen) and
> from Sean (tightening up the language around DTLS). You can review the
> change history at https://datatracker.ietf.org/
> doc/charter-ietf-tram/history/.
>
> The proposed charter will also be shared with other SDOs that participate
> in the new-work mailing list, to collect their thoughts and identify any
> potential conflicts or gaps.
>
> If we get positive feedback, we'll put TRAM on an upcoming formal telechat
> agenda, for approval to create a working group. That could happen before
> London, but TRAM will meet in London, whether as a WG or as a BOF.
>
> What would be helpful to me, at this point, is for you folks to converge
> on the first two or three problem areas an approved working group should
> have as milestones.
>
> You can do that on the list, or you can spend the first meeting slot
> figuring that out. I'd prefer if you can figure that out on the list.
>
> So, if you could start a thread for each problem area you'd like to see as
> a priority, that would be AWESOME ...
>
> Thanks, and thanks for the work you've already done to get this far.
>
> Spencer
> _______________________________________________
> tram mailing list
> tram@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram
>