At 11:43 AM -0700 3/11/09, David A. Bryan wrote:
>All,
>
>Brian and I have discussed the agenda requests (there were many) and
Howdy,
As one of those whose questions can be answered outside of
meeting time, I would like folks to send me any issues with or suggested
updates you'd like to see to draft-hardie-p2psip-p2p-pointers. I'll try to
incorporate any that come in; then I'll likely ask for the provisional
URI registrations (during the meeting, or just after).
As a reminder, here's my text about the update:
thanks,
Ted
>So, I have updated draft-hardie-p2psip-p2p-pointers to 01, eliminating the
>MIME type and focusing on the URIs. I would like to ask two questions:
>
>1) Does anyone object to a request for provisional registration at this point,
>so we can start experimenting with these? As a sub bullet, does
>anyone have feedback on the IANA registries requested by this doc and
>have any objections/input/better ideas?
>
>2) Is anyone interested in progressing the MIME type work? I took it out
>because it seemed to overlap the application/p2p-overlay+xml stuff in
>the reload base draft, and I didn't want too much confusion. I think the cases
>are distinguishable, but I wasn't sure anyone wanted the pointers to be that
>distinct from bootstrap information. If anyone does care, speaking up now
>would
>be handy.
>
>A short discussion during the meeting would resolve this, but if folks have
>opinions
>now and want to put them onto the mailing list, we can also likely resolve it
>here.
>If we do want to go forward on the URI side now, the next steps would be
>discussion
>on the uri-review and uri mailing lists.
> regards,
> Ted
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
