On Mar 21, 2008, at 12:40 PM, ext Vijay K. Gurbani wrote: > However, we need to now converge on > which track to put domain-certs on: Info, BCP, or PS? Both Scott > and I believe that it should be at least BCP, if not PS; and > others that reviewed the draft also assumed it was PS. > > What would be the best way to close this one administrative issue > so we can submit the revised drafts accordingly: list discussion or > phone conference? If the latter, I can send email out to the chairs, > you, Scott and me, and any interested list participants to > converge on a time and date.
Agree we need to have a look at this and sort it out - it's not obvious to me what is the best thing to do yet. I want to read the draft from point of view of figuring out what recommendation in it change 3261 or not. This might sound easy but it is often not because 3261 is less than clear on some of these topics (this is the big reason we need this draft in the first place). For example, this draft clearly requires implementations to do RFC 3280. The question is does 3261 require implementations to do some RFC that got updated or replaced by 3280? I suspect the answer is "no" - however, tracing the tangled web of this is time consuming. I am going to be on vacation all next week and trying to minimize email so I don't really plan to do much with this till the week after. I suspect that this is something where the authors, chairs, and ADs should figure out a plan off list then bring it back to the list to check the WG is OK with it. Cullen <in my AD role> _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.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
