Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-stun-origin-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Simon,

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]
> wrote:

>
>
> On 12/05/15 17:12, Simon Perreault wrote:
> > Le 2015-05-11 21:19, Stephen Farrell a écrit :
> >> Sorry no. I think this one requires some higher bandwidth (or more
> >> extended;-) discussion.
> >
> > So, uh, what is normal procedure in this case? Should we set up a
> > conference call?
>
> It'll be discussed on this Thursday's IESG telechat is the next
> step. We may end up with some concall being needed, bit early to
> say (I'd guess) but Spencer as responsible AD will drive that
> along.


Just to follow up on this ...

Stephen's correct, and Simon is invited as document shepherd in case a
high-bandwidth Q&A is still needed (of course, the rest of the world is
invited to attend as observers). That can allow probably five to ten
minutes of discussion on a single document.

If more discussion is needed, I would add it to the agenda for the informal
telechat scheduled the following Thursday, when we can spend more time.
It's possible to set up ad hoc conference calls, but that would require
doodle polls with busy people to schedule one, and the IESG already has
informal telechats on our calendars.

Having said that, e-mail is still a good thing, and the discussion that's
happening (now, I believe, on the thread under Allisa's Discuss) looks
promising. My suggestion is to make sure we all understand what the
information we're discussing is (the difference between ethereal RTCWeb
usernames and long-lived SIP usernames seems important), and who has to
know that information.

I hope that's helpful, of course.

SPencer


> S.
>
> >
> > Simon
> >
>