The work on ICE is truly impressive and so are the numerous I-Ds associated with ICE.
However, before sending the <ice-17> I-D for LC to the IESG, it would be prudent and responsible to the industry (that spends considerable resources on ICE in good faith) implementing ICE, to either (1) make it an informational RFC or (2) publish some deployment data showing such items as: * NAT scenarios that have been tested, * The % of success, * Performance, such as call setup delay using SIP. I have not seen any such public data on ICE deployment, for example with SIP. A private report has raised my concern about the performance of ICE. In the best IETF tradition, it would also help to have open source code available for ICE, before declaring it a standard. ICE is too important for the IETF (good work Jonathan and other authors!) not to publish (1) deployment results and (2) publish open source code as well. The various nits discussed on the lists are only of secondary importance to the LC compared to the above and would get resolved with such a process anyway. These are my personal two cents. Henry Sinnreich
_______________________________________________ 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
