Adam, Thanks. As far as draft-roach is concerned, that helps, since it seems the process might be a bit quicker. In fact, if there is already intent to submit this via the AD-sponsored route in the near future, I guess this need not hold up ach-analysis any longer.
John > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Roach [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 06 November 2009 01:15 > To: Elwell, John > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [BLISS] FW: I-D > Action:draft-ietf-bliss-ach-analysis-05.txt > > On 10/19/09 9:51 PM, Elwell, John wrote: > > The reason for this new version is solely because the old > one had expired. It still awaits draft-ietf references to > replace the draft-roach and draft-griffin references, before > it can be progressed. > > > For what it's worth, the draft-roach-sip-http-subscribe > document may not > go through a working group. It is far more likely that it will be > published as an AD sponsored document -- which means that it goes > directly from draft-roach-... to RFC... > > On that front, I apologize for not being able to move the document > forward the past few months -- a series of fire drills at my > "day job," > as it were, have kept me more busy than normal. > > /a > _______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
