As Dan mentions below, there was a call in Stockholm to (pending the changes requested) adopt this work as a WG item:
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-matuszewski-p2psip-security-overview-00.txt As the authors feel they have made the requested changes, I'd like to ask folks on list to confirm this consensus. Please send comments about adoption to the list, and we'll make a call after there has been time to review and comment (at least a week). Thanks, David (as chair) On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Dan York <[email protected]> wrote: > P2PSIP working group members, > > At IETF 75, we were given the direction to remove the RFC 2119 language from > the document and move it from being a normative doc to a purely > informational doc. I have now started this and made a number of other > changes, including most notably the name change from > "p2psip-security-requirements" to "p2psip-security-overview": > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-matuszewski-p2psip-security-overview-00.txt > > Chairs, per the discussion that apparently happened at IETF75, we would like > to ask for this to be considered as a working group document. > > Please note... I made a mistake in the submission process and also submitted > this as: > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-matuszewski-p2psip-security-requirements-06.txt > > They are IDENTICAL except for the name change. > > Thank you for your consideration, > Dan > > -- > Dan York, Director of Conversations > Voxeo Corporation http://www.voxeo.com [email protected] > Phone: +1-407-455-5859 Skype: danyork > > Join the Voxeo conversation: > Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com > Twitter: http://twitter.com/voxeo http://twitter.com/danyork > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/voxeo > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > P2PSIP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip > _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
