Subject: [AAA-WG]: AAA WG Last Call on Diameter SIP Application

From: Bernard Aboba <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 10:58:48 -0800 (PST)

This is an announcement of a AAA WG last call on "Diameter SIP
Application" prior to sending the document to the IESG for consideration
as a Proposed Standard.

The document is available here:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-aaa-diameter-sip-app-06.txt

AAA WG Last Call will last until March 14, 2005.  Please send comments to
the AAA WG mailing list ([email-masked]), so that they can be tracked.

Note that the RADEXT WG will simultaneously be requesting a WG Last Call
on the "RADIUS Extension for Digest Authentication" document, to end on
the same day.  Since both documents need to remain in sync to ensure
interoperation between RADIUS and Diameter, we encourage participants in
both the AAA and RADEXT WGs to read both documents and comment on them.

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 10:36:37 +0200

A reminder:

The list of current open issues is stored at:

http://danforsberg.info:8080/draft-ietf-aaa-diameter-sip/

We have 7 issues listed there, all of them have proposed resolutions, I 
will be implementing them unless I hear voices against.

/Miguel

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:07:54 +0200

Folks:

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this is the last 
time we can do changes to the Diameter SIP application draft. The WGLC 
will end on March 14th.

Although I have tried my best to keep the draft up-to-date, I wouldn't 
be surprise that there are inconsistencies here and there, mainly driven 
from old versions of the draft.

Therefore, I would like to have some eyes that take a careful inspection 
at it, or select parts of the draft.

So this is a call for volunteers to inspect the document, or a fraction 
of it. Volunteers don't even need to read the whole document, but just 
look for consistency checks, such as "is this AVP defined, where, is it 
used"... Also a kind of vertical check, such as "let's find all the 
occurrences of AVP foo and look for its consistent usage" would help.

So if you want to volunteer for this review, please drop me an e-mail 
indicating the items you will commit to inspect (the whole draft or some 
aspect). I will be synchronizing that there are no overlaps.

Thanks for your cooperation,

      Miguel