Subject: [Enum] Feedback by 2010-09-24 (was: Way forward after the ENUM trilogy)

From: Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:34:09 +0200 (CEST)

Dear ENUM WG members

Our shephering AD has just made a proposal on how to proceed with the ENUM 
WG documents that are residing in the publication queue after the 3 main 
ENUM WG documents (the ENUM Trilogy) will have been approved (see below).

Any feedback concerning this proposal is expected to <[email-masked]>.

    by Fri, 24th of September 2010

After this deadline, the final decision will be made concerning these 
documents.

All the best,
  Bernie, co-chair of the ENUM WG

--

http://ucom.ch/
Tech Consulting for Internet Standardization

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 14:56:01
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Enum] Way forward after the ENUM trilogy

Hi,

as you know, we are currently focusing on getting the ENUM trilogy
approved. In addition to the ENUM trilogy, there are a number of ENUM
drafts. This is how we intend to handle them:

draft-ietf-enum-edns0-00
   This draft will be abandoned because a DNSEXT document already
   provides the same functionality.

draft-ietf-enum-iax-05
   This draft will be updated to comply with enumservices-guide as soon
   as enumservices-guide is approved.

draft-ietf-enum-cnam-08
draft-ietf-enum-unused-04
   The ENUM WG will not work on these drafts any longer because the
   issues these drafts deal with are being discussed in a wider context
   within the E2MD initiative.

We would like to update the milestones in the charter according to this
plan. Your input on this plan is very welcome.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

---

From: Peter Koch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 19:57:16 +0200

Bernie, WG,

> ENUM WG documents (the ENUM Trilogy) will have been approved (see below).

Gonzalo> We would like to update the milestones in the charter according to this
Gonzalo> plan. Your input on this plan is very welcome.

isn't this a lot of prose to describe the empty set? In other words, can
we expect the WG to be closed after victory will have been declared?

>   as enumservices-guide is approved.

No objection to any part of the plan, just to remark that with the new
registration guidelines there's no real need for a WG document anymore.
That is, this one does not have to extend the wg's lifetime, even if it gets
published later.

We can now start talking about an ENUM Operations WG.

-Peter (only half kidding)

---

From: "Richard Shockey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 14:26:47 -0400

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Peter Koch
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 1:57 PM
To: Bernie Hoeneisen
Cc: IETF ENUM list
Subject: Re: [Enum] Feedback by 2010-09-24 (was: Way forward after the ENUM
trilogy)

Bernie, WG,

> ENUM WG documents (the ENUM Trilogy) will have been approved (see below).

Gonzalo> We would like to update the milestones in the charter according to
this
Gonzalo> plan. Your input on this plan is very welcome.

RS> I certainly hope so .. I see no reason why the WG should remain open
after the trilogy is approved by the IESG. We're done .

RS> Well there are enough private ENUM systems out there to almost justify
it ... ( only half kidding as well)

---

From: Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 11:09:32 +0200 (CEST)

Hi Peter et al.

> That is, this one does not have to extend the wg's lifetime, even if it gets

To mitigate potential confusion:

We do not intend to change the publication process for 
draft-ietf-enum-iax, i.e. it will be processed as ENUM WG Document via the 
ENUM publication queue.

draft-ietf-enum-iax is straight-forward, not controversial and currently 
awaiting the ENUM Triology. After we are set with the ENUM Trilogy, 
draft-ietf-enum-iax is to be updated to comply with the new rules 
(according to draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide) and published as 
(Informational) RFC.

[IMHO, looking for a new home for draft-ietf-enum-iax, just for the sake 
of shutting down the ENUM WG a little bit earlier does not justify the 
increased management effort.]

cheers,
  Bernie, ENUM WG co-chair