Subject: [Dime] DIME WG Status Update (August 2007)

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:54:02 +0200

A new DIME WG status update is available. See
http://www.tschofenig.priv.at/twiki/bin/view/Dime/DimeStatusUpdate

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

---

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:48:43 +0200

Questions:

1. Diameter QoS 
Action item: Determine next steps for a potential document
restructuring. 

[DR} - whose action item is this? 

2. Diameter Applications Design Guidelines 
It is necessary to create another draft update to reflect recently
received review comments, namely: 

More clarification on application versioning using optional avps. 
Comments centered around vendor specific command code allocation 
Editorials. 
Then, the document will be sent for review to other SDOs. 

Planned WGLC: December 2007

[DR] - which SDOs? Do you plan to have the document first reviewed with
other SDOs and then enter WGLC? Why not enter directly WGLC and ask the
other SDOs to provide their inputs as WGLC comments? 

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007 11:54 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Dime] DIME WG Status Update (August 2007)
>

---

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - DE/Germany - MiniMD)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:52:22 +0200

Hi Dan, 

> [DR} - whose action item is this? 

Good point. That's my action item. 

> other SDOs to provide their inputs as WGLC comments? 

Regarding the SDOs: 
I was thinking about 3GPP, OMA, ITU-T, TISPAN, and 3GPP2. 

Your suggestion regarding combining the WGLC with the feedback from
other SDOs is good. 

> Dan

Thanks for your feedback. Good to know that someone reads my mails...

Ciao
Hannes