OMA sent us a liaison statement on xcap-diff before the Prague
meeting. This LS is available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaison_detail.cgi?detail_id=303
We owe them a response. I propose the following:
DRAFT response to OMA LS 178 on xcap-diff
The IETF SIP working group thanks the OMA PAG working group for
communicating with us in regards to PAG's requirements for an XCAP
event package.
A design team met in an ad-hoc session during IETF 68, and reached
the conclusion that a more general solution to the problem of change
reporting on XCAP documents than that provided by the current SIPPING
config framework draft would be desirable. The team achieved
consensus on working from the document draft-urpalainen-sip-xcap-diff-
event-01 as baseline text.
It has not yet been determined by the IETF leadership as to which
working group will develop this event package, but current indicators
are that this would be within the scope of the SIPPING working group,
and that initial editorial work will be provided in large part by
Jari Urpalienen.
The largest open issue with this work appears to be related to the
initial synchronization phase. Questions related to this were raised
by Jari on the SIP mailing list on April 25. The SIP working group
would like to encourage OMA PAG to participate in this discussion on
the SIP mailing list and to consider whether the limitations of the
current mechanism as discussed by Jari are acceptable for PAG's
requirements.
--
Dean Willis
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
