From christer.holmberg@ericsson.com Wed Sep 5 04:14:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE38221F853D for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 04:14:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JZr31c5KkzqJ for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 04:14:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7ADE21F8514 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 04:14:15 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f046d00000644c-9b-504734069e0a Received: from esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id AC.83.25676.60437405; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:14:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.99]) by esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.93]) with mapi; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:14:14 +0200 From: Christer Holmberg To: "straw@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:14:12 +0200 Thread-Topic: Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 Thread-Index: Ac2LV1tCBJ1S1mVeT02o1KmUCivHoQ== Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8ESESSCMS0356e_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrS6biXuAQd9cIYtbzY9ZHRg9liz5 yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVsWvWQaaCNo2KnQ8fsjUwzlPuYuTgkBAwkTiyI7KLkRPIFJO4 cG89WxcjF4eQwClGif1b77JCOPMZJbZf+MkG0sAmYCHR/U8bpEFEQFViwpebjCA2i4CKxLWD y5lAbGEBd4mew39ZIGp8JD5OXsEMYetJ/Fg2mR3E5hUIl7j58j8biM0ItPj7qTVgvcwC4hK3 nsxngjhIQGLJnvPMELaoxMvH/1gh6kUl7rSvZwQ5h1kgX2LxQT2IkYISJ2c+YZnAKDQLyaRZ CFWzkFRBlOhILNj9iQ3C1pZYtvA1M4x95sBjJmTxBYzsqxiFcxMzc9LLjfRSizKTi4vz8/SK UzcxAiPh4JbfqjsY75wTOcQozcGiJM5rvXWPv5BAemJJanZqakFqUXxRaU5q8SFGJg5OqQbG 1VGb5t+a6V4l+Pngu6V7WRhfLFffWvZy2866be+mtU2eclXboiF/pck30XNCmsyFxu8Wcrs4 Z8r1rAtI59ybwPcw+PDyxQ46GwM5XdXeMXJNVjpxh+Hu+a3q7R+TLW21j7bNt7+SLC5V5+Sw 4MAhNuuPbHvmLAsy3q7vF+aySVnk82LX3YWpSizFGYmGWsxFxYkAVtp1F1ICAAA= Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 11:14:22 -0000 --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8ESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-stra= w-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft for= the same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our delivery. Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the list by Wednesday 12^th September. Regards, Christer & Victor (as chairs) --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8ESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

 

A= s mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is =

a taxonomy document defining role-types o= f B2BUAs.

 

We believe that having a common understanding and agreem= ent of the

different B2BUA roles is = essential for our other deliverables.

 

The only proposal on the tab= le is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt=

 

Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a = draft for the

same delivery, but nob= ody has indicated an intention to do so.

 

Therefore, we would now l= ike to ask the WG for adoption of

dr= aft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our

delivery.

Please indicate your support o= f, or objection to, this proposal on the

list by Wednesday 12^th September.

Regards,

Christer & Vict= or (as chairs)

 

<= p class=3DMsoNormal> 

= --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8ESESSCMS0356e_-- From mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com Wed Sep 5 10:35:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8500C21F8669 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:35:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.622 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.622 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.976, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id STaxRUjdp+pg for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC9D21F865E for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbky2 with SMTP id y2so646122lbk.31 for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:35:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=1RbWAgK4dO2EK2RqIiEgB5soNI8yjZaHLdusxHTfEt0=; b=klQU+Qg04x3fF2R6goYLRRlIOdW9vo2r46TOWNuJmadz4fK0tmel910uylsxGqLWBg WWZwNA1c0lWfiDRB9LpamrjJJhf7EnDTM+5D8rr0wFsucF0E94NEfPKnsR0P2c9/uUT6 DrhTJ4t4LFop72/BBARhC2bHQcoVSqZydfoKiUDPItZ4y1eeeMpwM/qDHc9ioQNusPvn 3Gbu4XQf0b3/Pch6IDNjR0lR0urHyvxQzR01ayncPb1YuP2P7abJkTZ7sfv5EgJ1JzzN +vkjlDBmI2MyN80nh8ds41CsiUAEtrrv4Utp6mdTt7QJyXCT+o8u5+B26N/RlZDf1ZC+ OK9g== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.28.167 with SMTP id c7mr8141726lbh.102.1346866549397; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.17.202 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:35:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 12:35:49 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: Christer Holmberg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec55405d23c987604c8f7ce46 Cc: "straw@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:35:51 -0000 --bcaec55405d23c987604c8f7ce46 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I support the adoption of this draft as the basis for the WG deliverable. Mary. On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:14 AM, Christer Holmberg < christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi,**** > > ** ** > > As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is *** > * > > a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. **** > > **** > > We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the **** > > different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.**** > > **** > > The only proposal on the table is: > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt**** > > ** ** > > Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft > for the **** > > same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.**** > > **** > > Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of **** > > draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our **** > > delivery.**** > > **** > > Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the *** > * > > list by Wednesday 12^th September.**** > > **** > > Regards,**** > > **** > > Christer & Victor (as chairs)**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > straw mailing list > straw@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > --bcaec55405d23c987604c8f7ce46 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support the adoption of this draft as the basis for the WG deliverable.
Mary.=A0

On Wed, Sep 5,= 2012 at 6:14 AM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericss= on.com> wrote:

Hi,

=A0

As mentioned= last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is

a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.

= =A0

We believe that having a common understanding and a= greement of the

different B2BUA roles is essential for= our other deliverables.

=A0

The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt<= u>

=A0

Last week we did ask whether someone else is pla= nning to submit a draft for the

same delivery, but nob= ody has indicated an intention to do so.

=A0=

Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of

draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for o= ur

delivery.

Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the <= u>

list by Wednesday 12^th September.

=

Regards,

Christer & Victor (as chairs)

=A0

=

=A0


_______________= ________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw


--bcaec55405d23c987604c8f7ce46-- From shida@ntt-at.com Wed Sep 5 22:14:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E89621F851A for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:14:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.264 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mw6EotyWb9gO for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:14:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gator465.hostgator.com (gator465.hostgator.com [69.56.174.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62AA21F8514 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [210.229.158.96] (port=64315 helo=[10.59.31.218]) by gator465.hostgator.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1T9UQ7-0003ej-PK; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 00:14:28 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1280) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_80E75735-64A2-4D5B-B63B-EAC9E03C1A1C" From: Shida Schubert In-Reply-To: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 14:14:25 +0900 Message-Id: <2B17E77E-CB23-45BF-B711-19D43AC2F3B0@ntt-at.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> To: Christer Holmberg X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1280) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator465.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ntt-at.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: ([10.59.31.218]) [210.229.158.96]:64315 X-Source-Auth: shida.schubert+tingle.jp X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: c3NoaWRhO3NzaGlkYTtnYXRvcjQ2NS5ob3N0Z2F0b3IuY29t Cc: "straw@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:14:29 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_80E75735-64A2-4D5B-B63B-EAC9E03C1A1C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I support the adoption. On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:14 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote: > Hi, > =20 > As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is > a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > =20 > We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the > different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > =20 > The only proposal on the table is: = http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > =20 > Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a = draft for the > same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > =20 > Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of > draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our > delivery. > Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the > list by Wednesday 12^th September. > Regards, > Christer & Victor (as chairs) > =20 > =20 > _______________________________________________ > straw mailing list > straw@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw --Apple-Mail=_80E75735-64A2-4D5B-B63B-EAC9E03C1A1C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

I support the = adoption.

On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:14 PM, Christer = Holmberg wrote:

Hi,
 
As mentioned last week, our = first scheduled delivery in the charter is
a taxonomy document defining role-types of = B2BUAs.
 
We believe that having a common understanding and = agreement of the
different B2BUA roles is = essential for our other deliverables.
 
The only proposal on the table = is:  
___________________________________________= ____
straw mailing list
 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 14:28:52 -0500 To: Shida Schubert , Christer Holmberg From: James Polk In-Reply-To: <2B17E77E-CB23-45BF-B711-19D43AC2F3B0@ntt-at.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <2B17E77E-CB23-45BF-B711-19D43AC2F3B0@ntt-at.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: "straw@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 19:28:55 -0000 How would this taxonomy affect INSIPID? In other words, B2BUAs (and SBCs) are the reason why a Session-ID is necessary. Will INSIPID's work need to account for each version of a B2BUA this document conjure up? The two WGs are interlinked (whether we like it or not), and I've not read or heard mentioned anything on the INSIPID list about these separate designations for B2BUAs and how these may or may not impact B2BUA behavior wrt any instance of a Session-ID... James At 12:14 AM 9/6/2012, Shida Schubert wrote: >I support the adoption. > >On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:14 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >>a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. >> >>We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >>different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. >> >>The only proposal on the table is: >>http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt >> >>Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >>draft for the >>same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. >> >>Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >>delivery. >>Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >>list by Wednesday 12^th September. >>Regards, >>Christer & Victor (as chairs) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>straw mailing list >>straw@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw From christer.holmberg@ericsson.com Wed Sep 12 05:22:17 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5700C21F85F7 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:22:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KblkLBI3CFoR for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E2B621F8602 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:22:15 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7fea6d000002ccb-6e-50507e75bf75 Received: from esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id B0.C7.11467.57E70505; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:22:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.99]) by esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.93]) with mapi; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:22:10 +0200 From: Christer Holmberg To: "straw@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:22:10 +0200 Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: Ac2Q36x/DpcGPsb+R2e2AQWXt0Cj9w== Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW5pXUCAwbsf4ha3mh+zOjB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEr49KGSewFv2wreu88ZWxg/GrWxcjJISFgInH73VEWCFtM4sK9 9WxdjFwcQgKnGCUuPFrHCOEsYJR4c2EdcxcjBwebgIVE9z9tkAYRAVWJCV9uMoLYLED2tptH wGxhgQSJP38XskPUJEp0/PzBCGHrSezdvJMNxOYVCJdoXLmRCcRmBFr8/dQaMJtZQFzi1pP5 TBAHCUgs2XOeGcIWlXj5+B8rRL2oxJ329YwQ9fkSO6dfgpopKHFy5hOWCYxCs5CMmoWkbBaS Moi4jsSC3Z/YIGxtiWULXzPD2GcOPGZCFl/AyL6KUTg3MTMnvdxQL7UoM7m4OD9Przh1EyMw Hg5u+a27g/HUOZFDjNIcLErivFxJ+/2FBNITS1KzU1MLUovii0pzUosPMTJxcEo1MLIL1t47 tvOkzr5E8biDE0WeSnzObVfXkO+ffeGxSd/FFSukG8Qf7Fn244rixXe2Uf73vtn4/vXx5z7+ 70ziCbYs76l+gb4+M3VFzUzefvZpfO3/XTX5oYzRRwM785iE7NfXfXlYsz+suL+9p6SyRF4u TzV9Ndfkj2f2OzoW7zcJq5vQZfRqiRJLcUaioRZzUXEiAFEWjCJVAgAA Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:22:17 -0000 --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (As co-chair) Hi, Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection for WG = adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for adopting the= draft. None has objected. Regards, Christer Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of C= hrister Holmberg Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 To: straw@ietf.org Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonom= y-00 Hi, As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-stra= w-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft for= the same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our delivery. Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the list by Wednesday 12^th September. Regards, Christer & Victor (as chairs) --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

(As co-chair)

 

<= span style=3D'color:#1F497D'>Hi,

=  

Note, that today is the “deadline&#= 8221; for indicating support/objection for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-stra= w-b2bua-taxonomy-00.

 

So far only a couple of individuals have indicated s= upport for adopting the draft. None has objected.

 

=

Regards,

 <= /span>

Christer<= /o:p>

&nb= sp;

Ps. = As individual, I support adopting the draft.

 

From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bou= nces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: 5. syy= skuuta 2012 14:14
To: straw@ietf.org
Subject: [straw] W= orking group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00

 

Hi,

 

<= p class=3DMsoPlainText>As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery= in the charter is

a taxonomy docume= nt defining role-types of B2BUAs.

&n= bsp;

We believe that having a common = understanding and agreement of the

d= ifferent B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.

 

The o= nly proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2= bua-taxonomy-00.txt

 

Last week we did ask whether someone else i= s planning to submit a draft for the

same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.<= /p>

 

The= refore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of

draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it th= e base for our

delivery.<= /p>

 

Ple= ase indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the

list by Wednesday 12^th September.

 

= Regards,

 

Christer & Victor (as chairs)

 

 =

= --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_-- From victor.pascual.avila@gmail.com Wed Sep 12 05:25:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3316521F8604 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:25:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sRibktDebMzI for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4123021F860B for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by weyu54 with SMTP id u54so1037854wey.31 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:25:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=xr89o78yuuKqvqJfEou/x+LWmH7TESlJ4MtDyo+QuNU=; b=p26tV7IbbCcnUZUTq2Ghtt53tx5ovTi8tXsKrrq9kzPwZl1c1ssnU3wAvoa2/LCSSb 3zyT8KAX7goHxVrS7Z4aUUGFXYUoOencxI3r/Qk5XQWwOE/TtyaFfIwmLYv7kY7wOas/ 6PF2vXGNPsLm67PIF0jaHKjiFIwwqyRR9zuKVQGD7nuPV5RHWIt03d9Y3UBUXLCEUMXy H4b4xyZTLxUmpGfkBt2xoE+ZETomknFnV7r5qmvTBfnwt8AjJiHM33aO5yQI9E2raQUa 6E0TYQibNpfw/fkWGxGoZaCnfDvIZOMzIEtMdi7Fx5YKoB23vwYNi7C5cpiGGYZMgwW6 yu1g== Received: by 10.216.44.3 with SMTP id m3mr12492918web.129.1347452728273; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:25:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.151.25.162] (29.Red-176-83-119.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net. [176.83.119.29]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t7sm11881854wix.6.2012.09.12.05.25.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:25:23 -0700 (PDT) References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> From: Victor Pascual Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-3A2E29AB-1A2F-4B61-A8FC-5FCB346231FF X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A4613D8@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Message-Id: Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:25:17 +0200 To: "straw@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:25:30 -0000 --Apple-Mail-3A2E29AB-1A2F-4B61-A8FC-5FCB346231FF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As individual, I support adopting the draft On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:14 PM, "Christer Holmberg" wrote: > Hi, > =20 > As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is > a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > =20 > We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the > different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > =20 > The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-str= aw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > =20 > Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft fo= r the > same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > =20 > Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of > draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our > delivery. > Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the > list by Wednesday 12^th September. > Regards, > Christer & Victor (as chairs) > =20 > =20 > _______________________________________________ > straw mailing list > straw@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw --Apple-Mail-3A2E29AB-1A2F-4B61-A8FC-5FCB346231FF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 As individual, I support adopti= ng the draft

On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:14 PM, "Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com= > wrote:

=

Hi,

 

As mentioned last week, our first scheduled deliv= ery in the charter is

a taxonomy do= cument defining role-types of B2BUAs.

 

We believe that having a c= ommon understanding and agreement of the

different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.

 

The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-= straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt

 

Last week we did ask whether some= one else is planning to submit a draft for the

same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.

 

Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of <= /o:p>

draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and= to make it the base for our

delive= ry.

Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on= the

list by Wednesday 12^th Septem= ber.

Regards,

=

Christer & Victor (as chairs)

 

&nb= sp;

_= ______________________________________________
straw mailing= list
straw@ietf.org
https= ://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw
= --Apple-Mail-3A2E29AB-1A2F-4B61-A8FC-5FCB346231FF-- From md3135@att.com Wed Sep 12 05:30:05 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB3921F84E7 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:30:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5tztE0kGztuS for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:30:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com [209.65.160.95]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE15921F8606 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:30:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown [144.160.128.153] (EHLO nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com) by nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.11.0-10) with ESMTP id b4080505.2aaaeec3d940.959610.00-532.2646818.nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:30:03 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 5050804b6ae4a481-593bf33b5ed9791ab95e982fc121bfecaffd68cb Received: from unknown [144.160.128.153] (EHLO flpi408.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.11.0-10) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id 44080505.0.959590.00-417.2646753.nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:29:58 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 50508046382a8e63-08646acea68a0b2a3b00325ddcde275b7a782856 Received: from enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by flpi408.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8CCTtag005934; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:29:56 -0700 Received: from fflint04.pst.cso.att.com (fflint04.pst.cso.att.com [150.234.39.64]) by flpi408.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8CCTlhQ005794 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:29:49 -0700 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUB9B.ITServices.sbc.com (misout7msghub9b.itservices.sbc.com [144.151.223.72]) by fflint04.pst.cso.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:29:31 -0700 Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSR9I.ITServices.sbc.com ([144.151.223.56]) by MISOUT7MSGHUB9B.ITServices.sbc.com ([144.151.223.72]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:29:30 -0400 From: "DOLLY, MARTIN C" To: Christer Holmberg , "straw@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: Ac2Q36x/DpcGPsb+R2e2AQWXt0Cj9wAAkOfA Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:29:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.175.96.153] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E42CCDDA6722744CB241677169E83656D6634DMISOUT7MSGUSR9IIT_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Spam: [F=0.2000000000; CM=0.500; S=0.200(2010122901)] X-MAIL-FROM: X-SOURCE-IP: [144.160.128.153] X-AnalysisOut: [v=1.0 c=1 a=ym73acELZNAA:10 a=rnstxzSykNYA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3] X-AnalysisOut: [cA:10 a=BLceEmwcHowA:10 a=xwOvzTHDVLE4u4nGvK72ag==:17 a=48] X-AnalysisOut: [vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=3xM0Tp9p7-giY2042qQA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=] X-AnalysisOut: [lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=HaP5J87VbyzMC164:21 a=ze-SmD_lOsouz0mz:2] X-AnalysisOut: [1 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=YSTpcBwnV7JEobONitcA] X-AnalysisOut: [:9 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=CGVdeu2CmLygzsZe:21 a=GPn7ZDFwqK8VoWId:] X-AnalysisOut: [21] Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:30:05 -0000 --_000_E42CCDDA6722744CB241677169E83656D6634DMISOUT7MSGUSR9IIT_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support adopting the draft as a WG document From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of C= hrister Holmberg Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:22 AM To: straw@ietf.org Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-tax= onomy-00 - REMINDER (As co-chair) Hi, Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection for WG = adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for adopting the= draft. None has objected. Regards, Christer Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-b= ounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 To: straw@ietf.org Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonom= y-00 Hi, As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-stra= w-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft for= the same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our delivery. Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the list by Wednesday 12^th September. Regards, Christer & Victor (as chairs) --_000_E42CCDDA6722744CB241677169E83656D6634DMISOUT7MSGUSR9IIT_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I support adopting the= draft as a WG document

 

From: straw-bo= unces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:22 AM
To: straw@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2= bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

 

(As co-chair)

 

Hi,<= /p>

 

Note, that today is th= e “deadline” for indicating support/objection for WG adoption o= f draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.

 

So far only a couple o= f individuals have indicated support for adopting the draft. None has objec= ted.

 

Regards,

 

Christer

 

Ps. As individual, I s= upport adopting the draft.

 

From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14
To: straw@ietf.org
Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-= taxonomy-00

 

Hi,

 

As mentioned last week, our first scheduled deliv= ery in the charter is

a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs= .

 

We believe that having a common understanding and= agreement of the

different B2BUA roles is essential for our other = deliverables.

 

The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt

 

Last week we did ask whether someone else is plan= ning to submit a draft for the

same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intent= ion to do so.

 

Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for ad= option of

draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make= it the base for our

delivery.

 

Please indicate your support of, or objection to,= this proposal on the

list by Wednesday 12^th September.

 

Regards,

 

Christer & Victor (as chairs)

 

 

--_000_E42CCDDA6722744CB241677169E83656D6634DMISOUT7MSGUSR9IIT_-- From R.Jesske@telekom.de Wed Sep 12 06:03:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB06621F8569 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 06:03:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 85sEnwG48++z for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 06:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail53.telekom.de (tcmail53.telekom.de [217.5.214.110]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CD2F21F8564 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 06:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he113472.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.130]) by tcmail51.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 12 Sep 2012 15:03:01 +0200 Received: from HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.17]) by HE113472.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:02:59 +0200 From: To: , , Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:02:57 +0200 Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: Ac2Q36x/DpcGPsb+R2e2AQWXt0Cj9wAAkOfAAAE+bvA= Message-ID: <580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D152D71A165@HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D152D71A165HE111648emea1_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:03:07 -0000 --_000_580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D152D71A165HE111648emea1_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 Roland ________________________________ Von: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von = DOLLY, MARTIN C Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. September 2012 14:30 An: Christer Holmberg; straw@ietf.org Betreff: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-tax= onomy-00 - REMINDER I support adopting the draft as a WG document From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of C= hrister Holmberg Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:22 AM To: straw@ietf.org Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-tax= onomy-00 - REMINDER (As co-chair) Hi, Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection for WG = adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for adopting the= draft. None has objected. Regards, Christer Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-b= ounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 To: straw@ietf.org Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonom= y-00 Hi, As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. The only proposal on the table is: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-stra= w-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft for= the same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our delivery. Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the list by Wednesday 12^th September. Regards, Christer & Victor (as chairs) --_000_580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D152D71A165HE111648emea1_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1
 
Roland

Von: straw-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von DOLLY, MARTIN=20 C
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. September 2012 14:30
An: Chri= ster=20 Holmberg; straw@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: [straw] Working group adopt= ion=20 of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

I support adopting the = draft as=20 a WG document

 

From:<= /B>=20 straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of=20 Christer Holmberg
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:22=20 AM
To: straw@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [straw] Working grou= p=20 adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 -=20 REMINDER

 

(As=20 co-chair)

 

Hi,

 

Note, that today is the= =20 “deadline” for indicating support/objection for WG adoption of= =20 draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.

 

So far only a couple of= =20 individuals have indicated support for adopting the draft. None has=20 objected.

 

Regards,

 

Christer

 

Ps. As individual, I su= pport=20 adopting the draft.

 

From:<= /B> straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] <= B>On=20 Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012=20 14:14
To: straw@ietf.org
Subject: [straw= ]=20 Working group adoption of=20 draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00

 

Hi,

 

As mentioned last week, our first scheduled deliver= y in=20 the charter is

a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.= =20

 

We believe that having a common understanding and=20 agreement of the

different B2BUA roles is essential for our other=20 deliverables.

 

The only proposal on the table is: ht= tp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt

 

Last week we did ask whether someone else is planni= ng to=20 submit a draft for the

same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intentio= n to do=20 so.

 

Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adop= tion of=20

draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make i= t the=20 base for our

delivery.

 

Please indicate your support of, or objection to, t= his=20 proposal on the

list by Wednesday 12^th September.

 

Regards,

 

Christer & Victor (as chairs)

 

 

--_000_580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D152D71A165HE111648emea1_-- From jmpolk@cisco.com Wed Sep 12 13:47:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC4C221F8617 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:47:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q+4KbVzBF3ED for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3815C21F8574 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:47:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2090; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347482843; x=1348692443; h=message-id:date:to:from:subject:in-reply-to:references: mime-version; bh=BrRnfyeoJGmg/cODJwK2D9+UkN71JDdimXR0LwI/+KI=; b=E5Z1dq0BLCXf6GLaeEj+ekKZvyGPhY+453z6ARjg3t3HZ/8Ox9TMwy6m rHfxQAb+5pzJEo7EH7X8z6MTuptb3cacamyntTeqPGp5aHyBHlG2Yt24N EY3cZP3H4RwLJuS//6tj0EflfiqSlbCWFFzwmJepjXrgkxHhKCr+lboc7 Y=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAEHzUFCrRDoI/2dsb2JhbABFu1mBB4IgAQEBBAEBAQ8BJQI0BBcHBBEEAQEBHgkHGQ4fCQgGARIJGYdqDJtnoDCLEIZCA4hVm0CBaYME X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,413,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="55486105" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Sep 2012 20:47:22 +0000 Received: from jmpolk-WS.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8715.cisco.com [10.99.80.22]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8CKlLr3025615; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:47:22 GMT Message-Id: <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:47:20 -0500 To: Christer Holmberg , "straw@ietf.org" From: James Polk In-Reply-To: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.ee mea.ericsson.se> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:47:23 -0000 At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > >boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > >(As co-chair) > >Hi, > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >adopting the draft. None has objected. But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting this draft yet. James > >Regards, > >Christer > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >To: straw@ietf.org >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > >Hi, > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > >The only proposal on the table is: >http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >draft for the >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >delivery. > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > >Regards, > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw From mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com Wed Sep 12 14:17:31 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E88D21F846E for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:17:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.564 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.632, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zYJ0drSuyhZq for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC0D221F846B for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:17:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbky2 with SMTP id y2so1601713lbk.31 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:17:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=fNB0Tm+QhwS/8B1JMd+n8EiEvUE9me3VUhNzi0hrhlQ=; b=U5E+byFqT3RN46NXccy0oOwAHP7DfaS/Fmib9UuL363LM5gxsMhm679TVSw4Zi2mtB ukIWglcZzl5ssVRpazgvLjG4QoxrEyVLQ3JnO4D2wIQLDFIhBoh01Sml6pBLbaMNrIwX 0qfUHuScR+jeIWpjMT1ZnIYeXHH+c/YQXaCxklLbWhs1vZpDexBmOaTrE6eO+78IRtMK Fd02FvIATu9eQ0ETr3Isj+I+/N+RBGKyJTFaZFApUxCN+3I/53F6fVniK4hLpcyz4rJg 3+JF/cBBMAKE5QExFByTN9b2DVCgPJpEj3QguzBg+Nmho5aZ3JdszLb9olavRqIYBSGY xTJw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.114.3 with SMTP id jc3mr20290668lab.11.1347484648754; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:17:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.0.199 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:17:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:17:28 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: James Polk , Hadriel Kaplan Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04088c7fd44d7204c987b792 Cc: "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:17:31 -0000 --f46d04088c7fd44d7204c987b792 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:47 PM, James Polk wrote: > At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: > >> Content-Language: en-US >> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> >> boundary=3D"_000_**7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05** >> 85340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" >> >> >> (As co-chair) >> >> Hi, >> >> Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection for >> WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00. >> >> So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for adopting >> the draft. None has objected. >> > > But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) abou= t > the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in INSIPID > that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting > this draft yet. > [MB] I was not entirely clear on your question/comment. Are you asking if the INSIPID documents need to consider each type of B2BUA (as the current docs don't go into any detail on different types of B2BUAs) and use this document as an informational reference? If that's the question, I think that's a question for INSIPID WG. Or are you asking if the deliverables in STRAW must consider the new header defined by INSIPID? If it's the latter, I don't think that has any impact on this document which is only defining taxonomies and not identifying explicitly how any specific headers should be handled=10. Note, I've addressed this response to Hadriel as well since he is an author of this doc, as well as the INSIPID WG requirements document, so his perspective might be helpful.[/MB] > > James > > >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. >> >> From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org**] On Behalf >> Of Christer Holmberg >> Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >> To: straw@ietf.org >> Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-** >> taxonomy-00 >> >> Hi, >> >> As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >> a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. >> >> We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >> different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. >> >> The only proposal on the table is: > kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-**00.txt >> >http://www.ietf.org/id/**draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00.txt >> >> >> Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft >> for the >> same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. >> >> Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >> draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >> delivery. >> >> Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >> list by Wednesday 12^th September. >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer & Victor (as chairs) >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> > > ______________________________**_________________ > straw mailing list > straw@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw > --f46d04088c7fd44d7204c987b792 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:47 PM, James Polk <jmp= olk@cisco.com> wrote:
At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53B= B74ESESSCMS0356e_"


(As co-chair)

Hi,

Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objecti= on for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.

So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for adopting the= draft. None has objected.

But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) about = the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in INSIPID tha= t no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting t= his draft yet.

[MB] =A0 I was not entirely clear on your = question/comment. =A0Are you asking if the INSIPID documents need to consid= er each type of B2BUA (as the current docs don't go into any detail on = different types of B2BUAs) and use this document as an informational refere= nce? If that's the question, I think that's a question for INSIPID = WG. =A0Or are you asking if the deliverables in STRAW must consider the new= header defined by INSIPID? =A0If it's the latter, I don't think th= at has any impact on this document which is only defining taxonomies and no= t identifying explicitly how any specific headers should be handled=10. =A0= =A0=A0

Note, I've addressed this response to Hadriel as we= ll since he is an author of this doc, as well as the INSIPID WG requirement= s document, so his perspective might be helpful.[/MB]

James


Regards,

Christer

Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft.

From: straw-bou= nces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmbe= rg
Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14
To: straw@ietf.org<= br> Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-= taxonomy-00

Hi,

As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is
a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.

We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the
different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.

The only proposal on the table is: <http://www.ietf.o= rg/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-t= axonomy-00.txt


Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a draft for= the
same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.

Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of
draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for ou= r
delivery.

Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the
list by Wednesday 12^th September.

Regards,

Christer & Victor (as chairs)


_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

--f46d04088c7fd44d7204c987b792-- From michael.yan@huawei.com Wed Sep 12 20:26:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A8A21F8545 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:26:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wmJepvhjWpTY for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:26:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9313E21F8543 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AJP73802; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 03:26:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 04:25:58 +0100 Received: from SZXEML426-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.34) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 04:26:03 +0100 Received: from SZXEML528-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.156]) by szxeml426-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.34]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 11:25:59 +0800 From: "Yanqiang (Michael)" To: "DOLLY, MARTIN C" , Christer Holmberg , "straw@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: AQHNkOJcsjo1sI6e+k2g+IVxy+qYA5eHnIPQ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 03:25:59 +0000 Message-ID: <21794EB0EE82B0458A524942A141542B305CBE3C@szxeml528-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.166.98.169] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 03:26:06 -0000 SSBzdXBwb3J0IHRoZSBhZG9wdGlvbi4NCg0KTWljaGFlbA0KIA0KDQo+IEZyb206IERPTExZLCBN QVJUSU4gQyBbbWFpbHRvOm1kMzEzNUBhdHQuY29tXSANCj4gU2VudDogV2VkbmVzZGF5LCBTZXB0 ZW1iZXIgMTIsIDIwMTIgODoyOSBQTQ0KPiBUbzogQ2hyaXN0ZXIgSG9sbWJlcmc7IHN0cmF3QGll dGYub3JnDQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbc3RyYXddIFdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgYWRvcHRpb24gb2Yg ZHJhZnQta2FwbGFuLXN0cmF3LWIyYnVhLXRheG9ub215LTAwIC0gUkVNSU5ERVINCg0KPiBJIHN1 cHBvcnQgYWRvcHRpbmcgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGFzIGEgV0cgZG9jdW1lbnQNCg0KPiBGcm9tOiBzdHJh dy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86c3RyYXctYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVo YWxmIE9mIENocmlzdGVyIEhvbG1iZXJnDQo+IFNlbnQ6IFdlZG5lc2RheSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDEy LCAyMDEyIDg6MjIgQU0NCj4gVG86IHN0cmF3QGlldGYub3JnDQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbc3Ry YXddIFdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgYWRvcHRpb24gb2YgZHJhZnQta2FwbGFuLXN0cmF3LWIyYnVhLXRh eG9ub215LTAwIC0gUkVNSU5ERVINCg0KPiAoQXMgY28tY2hhaXIpDQoNCj4gSGksDQoNCj4gTm90 ZSwgdGhhdCB0b2RheSBpcyB0aGUg4oCcZGVhZGxpbmXigJ0gZm9yIGluZGljYXRpbmcgc3VwcG9y dC9vYmplY3Rpb24gZm9yIFdHIGFkb3B0aW9uIG9mIGRyYWZ0LWthcGxhbi1zdHJhdy1iMmJ1YS10 YXhvbm9teS0wMC4NCg0KPiBTbyBmYXIgb25seSBhIGNvdXBsZSBvZiBpbmRpdmlkdWFscyBoYXZl IGluZGljYXRlZCBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBhZG9wdGluZyB0aGUgZHJhZnQuIE5vbmUgaGFzIG9iamVj dGVkLg0KDQo+IFJlZ2FyZHMsDQoNCj4gQ2hyaXN0ZXINCg0KPiBQcy4gQXMgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCwg SSBzdXBwb3J0IGFkb3B0aW5nIHRoZSBkcmFmdC4NCg0KPiBGcm9tOiBzdHJhdy1ib3VuY2VzQGll dGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86c3RyYXctYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIENocmlz dGVyIEhvbG1iZXJnDQo+IFNlbnQ6IDUuIHN5eXNrdXV0YSAyMDEyIDE0OjE0DQo+IFRvOiBzdHJh d0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBTdWJqZWN0OiBbc3RyYXddIFdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgYWRvcHRpb24gb2Yg ZHJhZnQta2FwbGFuLXN0cmF3LWIyYnVhLXRheG9ub215LTAwDQoNCj4gSGksDQoNCj4gQXMgbWVu dGlvbmVkIGxhc3Qgd2Vlaywgb3VyIGZpcnN0IHNjaGVkdWxlZCBkZWxpdmVyeSBpbiB0aGUgY2hh cnRlciBpcyANCj4gYSB0YXhvbm9teSBkb2N1bWVudCBkZWZpbmluZyByb2xlLXR5cGVzIG9mIEIy QlVBcy4gDQrCoA0KPiBXZSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgaGF2aW5nIGEgY29tbW9uIHVuZGVyc3RhbmRp bmcgYW5kIGFncmVlbWVudCBvZiB0aGUgDQo+IGRpZmZlcmVudCBCMkJVQSByb2xlcyBpcyBlc3Nl bnRpYWwgZm9yIG91ciBvdGhlciBkZWxpdmVyYWJsZXMuDQrCoA0KPiBUaGUgb25seSBwcm9wb3Nh bCBvbiB0aGUgdGFibGUgaXM6IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaWQvZHJhZnQta2FwbGFuLXN0 cmF3LWIyYnVhLXRheG9ub215LTAwLnR4dA0KDQo+IExhc3Qgd2VlayB3ZSBkaWQgYXNrIHdoZXRo ZXIgc29tZW9uZSBlbHNlIGlzIHBsYW5uaW5nIHRvIHN1Ym1pdCBhIGRyYWZ0IGZvciB0aGUgDQo+ IHNhbWUgZGVsaXZlcnksIGJ1dCBub2JvZHkgaGFzIGluZGljYXRlZCBhbiBpbnRlbnRpb24gdG8g ZG8gc28uDQrCoA0KPiBUaGVyZWZvcmUsIHdlIHdvdWxkIG5vdyBsaWtlIHRvIGFzayB0aGUgV0cg Zm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uIG9mIA0KPiBkcmFmdC1rYXBsYW4tc3RyYXctYjJidWEtdGF4b25vbXktMDAs IGFuZCB0byBtYWtlIGl0IHRoZSBiYXNlIGZvciBvdXIgDQo+IGRlbGl2ZXJ5Lg0KDQo+IFBsZWFz ZSBpbmRpY2F0ZSB5b3VyIHN1cHBvcnQgb2YsIG9yIG9iamVjdGlvbiB0bywgdGhpcyBwcm9wb3Nh bCBvbiB0aGUgDQo+IGxpc3QgYnkgV2VkbmVzZGF5IDEyXnRoIFNlcHRlbWJlci4NCg0KPiBSZWdh cmRzLA0KDQo+IENocmlzdGVyICYgVmljdG9yIChhcyBjaGFpcnMpDQoNCg0K From christer.holmberg@ericsson.com Thu Sep 13 00:29:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D2621F850D for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:29:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sg6jK9QYScRS for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:29:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B9CF21F84BF for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:29:50 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f046d00000644c-31-50518b6d2ae6 Received: from esessmw0237.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 0F.CE.25676.D6B81505; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:29:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.99]) by esessmw0237.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.90]) with mapi; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:29:48 +0200 From: Christer Holmberg To: James Polk , "straw@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:29:48 +0200 Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: Ac2RJ9DP9+0U2CmRQd27jwHngasYqwAWQlft Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se>, <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW5ud2CAwfvXohY71hRa3Gp+zOrA 5DHl90ZWjyVLfjIFMEVx2aSk5mSWpRbp2yVwZSxZdYitoFek4vjcZtYGxscCXYycHBICJhK7 p15ih7DFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwilFiVcMeFghnAaPE+ZvdQA4HB5uAhUT3P22QBhEBF4mnf9pY QGwWAVWJRS+6wEqEBRIl7j3IgyhJknj04zQrhG0kcbq1mQnE5hUIl9h5fA0rxPguRokTGw4z gyQ4Bewlpv24B3YQI9BB30+tAWtgFhCXuPVkPhPEoQISS/acZ4awRSVePv7HClEvKnGnfT0j RL2OxILdn9ggbG2JZQtfM0MsFpQ4OfMJywRG0VlIxs5C0jILScssJC0LGFlWMQrnJmbmpJcb 6aUWZSYXF+fn6RWnbmIERsjBLb9VdzDeOSdyiFGag0VJnNd66x5/IYH0xJLU7NTUgtSi+KLS nNTiQ4xMHJxSDYyaVW5s6cpbr85bWnyjZOmSoh2dzopRDVvC6k7+rjv8f9O6uzUud1eG/a8x b6s/sqJiarqhmuOSf9wThRsSBD+IBQptUZ/Ts+3i1+QgvedKD0uE36Tf7Dkfdtjlp+63pWqT Yy/VJWQt2Xsgp6DjcWPvMe/1AYuZ+W2Yfx65PNWn33+3+YOdn38psRRnJBpqMRcVJwIABKfc bl4CAAA= Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 07:29:51 -0000 Hi James, The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA rol= es.=20 If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anything pr= eventing that. Regards, Christer ________________________________________ From: James Polk [jmpolk@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM To: Christer Holmberg; straw@ietf.org Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-ta= xonomy-00 - REMINDER At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > >boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > >(As co-chair) > >Hi, > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >adopting the draft. None has objected. But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting this draft yet. James > >Regards, > >Christer > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >To: straw@ietf.org >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > >Hi, > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > >The only proposal on the table is: >http://ww= w.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >draft for the >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >delivery. > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > >Regards, > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw= From jmpolk@cisco.com Thu Sep 13 14:15:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FD5C21F8643 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:15:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I1ZBuqiLSYdy for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:15:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-4.cisco.com (mtv-iport-4.cisco.com [173.36.130.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE90321F8628 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:15:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3819; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347570954; x=1348780554; h=message-id:date:to:from:subject:in-reply-to:references: mime-version; bh=4Bbz0Op6+5cLZo5hGwQCZholMZd89T9xsxpzcAzusUc=; b=JwguxtandBgaIdZo89xkYKpfmjY/VsblUJotJEScGn+BbbXLUvErCpGY Y72aCMsKpKAA8RbJAY1BSpZNU5dRZJUbI/yk8q0aHA5rWffjWl/FkBimo ASyJwUJpxzP9f8Kwfv/jTyF0WyeHb+KoddpH7BYTSMXWdi38yk6/bkf0O U=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,419,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="58099305" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2012 21:15:52 +0000 Received: from jmpolk-WS.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8715.cisco.com [10.99.80.22]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8DLFpiJ018419; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:15:51 GMT Message-Id: <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:15:51 -0500 To: Christer Holmberg , James Polk , "straw@ietf.org" From: James Polk In-Reply-To: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.ee mea.ericsson.se> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:15:54 -0000 Christer I think you're misunderstanding my issue. I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating *which* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any explanation within any draft or RFC going forward. IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real detail exists to give more granular context. And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complicated, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the impact. James At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Hi James, > >The idea is to have a general document, which describes different >B2BUA roles. > >If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see >anything preventing that. > >Regards, > >Christer > >________________________________________ >From: James Polk [jmpolk@cisco.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM >To: Christer Holmberg; straw@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption >of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER > >At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: > >Content-Language: en-US > >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > > > >boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > > > >(As co-chair) > > > >Hi, > > > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection > >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > > > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for > >adopting the draft. None has objected. > >But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) >about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in >INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor >of adopting this draft yet. > >James > > > > >Regards, > > > >Christer > > > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > > > >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On > >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg > >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 > >To: straw@ietf.org > >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of > >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > > > >Hi, > > > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is > >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > > > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the > >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > > > >The only proposal on the table is: > >ht > tp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > > > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a > >draft for the > >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > > > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of > >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our > >delivery. > > > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the > >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > > > >Regards, > > > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >straw mailing list > >straw@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw From mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com Thu Sep 13 14:26:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7269C21F8618 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.610, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iQ2+80Yp4bxE for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7DD21F860E for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lahm15 with SMTP id m15so2410615lah.31 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=vPj+63XDkhd//QI7HCTyeZ1jMWCq1Dcr1xsVhg03Em0=; b=wyoOWY48GveiyUm5esn5joucfDeJ00/vOIEEaLPq5cvexQvNQ8URzwRa0E4c9QouKO Zb+kItndk9oKvUkSeohGCf8kHWR7BE5AtM4Of6Gagok7lJMyxl2+ldAUCTZTe6Ha1iTY DJRu2KNS5pCm5JUeDJSFLaXIZXX1s3HtM6ydE/j5uzS9fivXUEuE+Qo44yKGE8T98dGl EART+nz7c4RK7GQRvZ2kiQj1EzDV+QKXumh846buL7m5N5sXY3iHOR/VOYdTm6IoRHvz tmsB6MAuIZPRMxX4Xfq1KXumYb0xekk3r7fjyEbah4vcAukkMVukj0Pkd7Io8BnLq4qQ Kg3A== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.51.201 with SMTP id m9mr370953lbo.2.1347571594837; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.0.199 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:26:34 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: James Polk Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0401678b383ff704c99bf6b8 Cc: "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:26:37 -0000 --f46d0401678b383ff704c99bf6b8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Comments below [MB]. Mary On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk wrote: > Christer > > I think you're misunderstanding my issue. > > I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating > *which* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or > use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in > that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different > types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any > explanation within any draft or RFC going forward. > [MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a discussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts this document. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is. Rather, the objective of this document is to characterize the different "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already deployed. The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to describe desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB] > > IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity > or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real > detail exists to give more granular context. [MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] > > And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive > through any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more > complicated, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment > on the impact. > [MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel), Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and this document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] > > James > > > At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: > >> Hi James, >> >> The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA >> roles. >> >> If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anything >> preventing that. >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> ______________________________**__________ >> From: James Polk [jmpolk@cisco.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM >> To: Christer Holmberg; straw@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua- >> **taxonomy-00 - REMINDER >> >> At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >> >Content-Language: en-US >> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> > >> >boundary="_000_**7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05** >> 85340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" >> > >> >(As co-chair) >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >> >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00. >> > >> >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >> >adopting the draft. None has objected. >> >> But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) >> about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in >> INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor >> of adopting this draft yet. >> >> James >> >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >Christer >> > >> >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. >> > >> >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org**] On >> >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >> >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >> >To: straw@ietf.org >> >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >> >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00 >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >> >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. >> > >> >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >> >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. >> > >> >The only proposal on the table is: >> >>ht >> tp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-**kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-**00.txt >> >> > >> >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >> >draft for the >> >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. >> > >> >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >> >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >> >delivery. >> > >> >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >> >list by Wednesday 12^th September. >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >Christer & Victor (as chairs) >> > >> > >> >_____________________________**__________________ >> >straw mailing list >> >straw@ietf.org >> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> ______________________________**_________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> > > ______________________________**_________________ > straw mailing list > straw@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw > --f46d0401678b383ff704c99bf6b8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Comments below [MB].

Mary

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk <jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote:
Christer

I think you're misunderstanding my issue.

I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating *w= hich* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or use-case,= possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in that WG. I = think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different types of B= 2BUAs - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any explanation= within any draft or RFC going forward.
[MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case = that's a discussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether= STRAW adopts this document. =A0However, I don't think STRAW is redefin= ing what a B2BUA is. Rather, the objective of this document is to character= ize the different "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already deployed. = =A0The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to describe desired behaviors tha= t will improve interoperability.[/MB]

IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity or= actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real detai= l exists to give more granular context.
[MB] This sentence= doesn't parse. [/MB]=A0
=A0

And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through= any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complica= ted, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the i= mpact.
[MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent= to Hadriel), =A0Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in IN= SIPID and this document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB]= =A0

James


At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi James,

The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA rol= es.

If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anythin= g preventing that.

Regards,

Christer

________________________________________
From: James Polk [jmp= olk@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM
To: Christer Holmberg; = straw@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of =A0draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-= taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>Content-Language: en-US
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>
>boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340= A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_"
>
>(As co-chair)
>
>Hi,
>
>Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/obj= ection
>for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.
>
>So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for
>adopting the draft. None has objected.

But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT)
about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in
INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting this draft yet.

James

>
>Regards,
>
>Christer
>
>Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft.
>
>From: straw= -bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On
>Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
>Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14
>To: straw@ietf.org<= /a>
>Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00
>
>Hi,
>
>As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is<= br> >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.
>
>We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the
>different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.
>
>The only proposal on the table is:
><http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw= -b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht tp://www.ietf.or= g/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt

>
>Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a
>draft for the
>same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.
>
>Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base fo= r our
>delivery.
>
>Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the<= br> >list by Wednesday 12^th September.
>
>Regards,
>
>Christer & Victor (as chairs)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>straw mailing list
>straw@ietf.org<= br> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw
_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

--f46d0401678b383ff704c99bf6b8-- From jmpolk@cisco.com Thu Sep 13 14:42:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DBEB21F8440 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:42:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o-R4IslKUTqR for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5096321F8645 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:42:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5393; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347572546; x=1348782146; h=message-id:date:to:from:subject:cc:in-reply-to: references:mime-version; bh=pEjhrmWMVTeaLOFAQ8vco2ktP8+h7HqozyQO3baDOic=; b=XSxTLsA0KT+Dkty3wV72siVUe3B/X0+Agegyjt5pr3n1kJnF1ta2hNIN 9Lt9q/f+TvEdpyPHBRKoWCouTnDizqHFszXCwfRsgFYJYyzSZpwvc9srT diulAWUVjpStvMtijNESw4yqcUio8VTL59wFgtdtwkOQqdqNitmh3frP/ A=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,419,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="55072121" Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2012 21:42:25 +0000 Received: from jmpolk-WS.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8715.cisco.com [10.99.80.22]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8DLgOdH026406; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:42:24 GMT Message-Id: <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:42:24 -0500 To: Mary Barnes From: James Polk In-Reply-To: References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: James Polk , "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:42:27 -0000 At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote: >Comments below [MB]. > >Mary > >On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk ><jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: >Christer > >I think you're misunderstanding my issue. > >I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating >*which* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or >use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the >work in that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into >several different types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to >_have_ to account for in any explanation within any draft or RFC going forward. > >[MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a >discussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW >adopts this document. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining >what a B2BUA is. Rather, the objective of this document is to >characterize the different "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already >deployed. The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to describe >desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB] > >IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any >entity or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms >where no real detail exists to give more granular context. > >[MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] s/can/call does that help? James > > > >And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive >through any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is >more complicated, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest >or comment on the impact. > >[MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to >Hadriel), Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in >INSIPID and this document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] > >James > > >At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Hi James, > >The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA roles. > >If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see >anything preventing that. > >Regards, > >Christer > >________________________________________ >From: James Polk [jmpolk@cisco.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM >To: Christer Holmberg; straw@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption >of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER > >At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: > >Content-Language: en-US > >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > > > >boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > > > >(As co-chair) > > > >Hi, > > > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection > >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > > > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for > >adopting the draft. None has objected. > >But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) >about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in >INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor >of adopting this draft yet. > >James > > > > >Regards, > > > >Christer > > > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > > > >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On > >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg > >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 > >To: straw@ietf.org > >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of > >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > > > >Hi, > > > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is > >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > > > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the > >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > > > >The only proposal on the table is: > ><h > ttp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht > tp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > > > > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a > >draft for the > >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > > > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of > >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our > >delivery. > > > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the > >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > > > >Regards, > > > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >straw mailing list > >straw@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw From mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com Thu Sep 13 15:14:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7232021F869A for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:14:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.593, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P4742g52M-gR for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B942C21F868A for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbky2 with SMTP id y2so2488079lbk.31 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:14:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=F8inEN/iCrTFjSI2d/9dIkKHsJBY5dbIJBN1kgl7V/U=; b=n1ACa69zrG7I5IkxWYYr919Yg6mALu8yI48DtETl4/W33/6+II4cw4h6YwabtMBM7+ oWTpC9sXMmJjHGISOB55nGPcfJ7MDiGm5TXzUxZv3WEtsRxN/qRBRq2O8UOTQg1BnCLY SoxLGlfmd/lokKEWwsA2bX8E88PW6RR+m46E3QWpwfnnmm8jQldYMEVlXL14g7XCyMMq mFKe8GsF/89BaupnENJR/LFkZTrM+dhFz9AE3V0+XW/5b20FPKA6tdxaFluQDDUrEU33 b6GhmS9vCvpzvixxqQldZ6a4/94FT7Ncro89XLVzBmUUn+Lnj+lU2PPZtCloB0ITTiGc 87XA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.110.40 with SMTP id hx8mr619221lab.9.1347574441683; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.0.199 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:14:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 17:14:01 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: James Polk Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54ee718e7a8ac04c99c9fb1 Cc: "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 22:14:06 -0000 --bcaec54ee718e7a8ac04c99c9fb1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James Polk wrote: > At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote: > >> Comments below [MB]. >> >> Mary >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk < >> jmpo**lk@cisco.com > wrote: >> Christer >> >> I think you're misunderstanding my issue. >> >> I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating >> *which* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or >> use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in >> that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different >> types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any >> explanation within any draft or RFC going forward. >> >> [MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a >> discussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts >> this document. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is. >> Rather, the objective of this document is to characterize the different >> "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already deployed. The idea behind the STRAW >> workgroup is to describe desired behaviors that will improve >> interoperability.[/MB] >> >> IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity >> or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real >> detail exists to give more granular context. >> >> [MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] >> > > s/can/call > > does that help? > [MB2] Yes it does. I don't necessarily think that is the case (i.e., that we can no longer use the general B2BUA term). You do have a higher level point (which is maybe what you were getting at initially) as to whether STRAW must consider and document the handling of the new header defined by INSIPID. If you read the STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific functions covered are expected to relate to already-published RFCs or existing RAI area work". In this case, folks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG deliverables in STRAW that identify the headers that must be preserved include the INSIPID header. But, as usual, I don't think there is lack of an overlap of participation that this is a problem. And, related to this thread, that doesn't impact this document under discussion which only defines topologies and doesn't identify any handling of headers. Personally, I think having STRAW work underway at the same time as INSIPID will only improve interoperability for the INSIPID header. Without, STRAW, you'd be assuming that each type of B2BUA would do the right thing and preserve the header. [/MB2] > > James > > >> >> >> And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive >> through any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more >> complicated, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment >> on the impact. >> >> [MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel), >> Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and this >> document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] >> >> James >> >> >> At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >> Hi James, >> >> The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA >> roles. >> >> If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anything >> preventing that. >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> ______________________________**__________ >> From: James Polk [jmpo**lk@cisco.com >> ] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM >> To: Christer Holmberg; straw@**ietf.org >> >> Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua- >> **taxonomy-00 - REMINDER >> >> At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >> >Content-Language: en-US >> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> > >> >boundary="_000_**7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05** >> 85340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" >> > >> >(As co-chair) >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >> >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00. >> > >> >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >> >adopting the draft. None has objected. >> >> But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) >> about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in >> INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor >> of adopting this draft yet. >> >> James >> >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >Christer >> > >> >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. >> > >> >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto: >> straw-bounces@ietf.org**] On >> >> >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >> >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >> >To: straw@**ietf.org >> >> >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >> >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00 >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >> >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. >> > >> >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >> >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. >> > >> >The only proposal on the table is: >> ><>h >> ttp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-**kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-**00.txt>ht >> tp:// >> >www.ietf.org/**id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00.txt >> >> >> > >> >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >> >draft for the >> >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. >> > >> >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >> >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-**taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >> >delivery. >> > >> >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >> >list by Wednesday 12^th September. >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >Christer & Victor (as chairs) >> > >> > >> >_____________________________**__________________ >> >straw mailing list >> >straw@**ietf.org >> >> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> ______________________________**_________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@**ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@**ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/straw >> > > --bcaec54ee718e7a8ac04c99c9fb1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James P= olk <jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote:
At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote:
Comments below [MB].

Mary

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk <<mailto:jmpolk@cisco.com>jmpolk@cisco.com> wr= ote:
Christer

I think you're misunderstanding my issue.

I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating *w= hich* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or use-case,= possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in that WG. I = think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different types of B= 2BUAs - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any explanation= within any draft or RFC going forward.

[MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a discu= ssion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts this= document. =A0However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA i= s. Rather, the objective of this document is to characterize the different = "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already deployed. =A0The idea behind= the STRAW workgroup is to describe desired behaviors that will improve int= eroperability.[/MB]

IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity or= actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real detai= l exists to give more granular context.

[MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB]

s/can/call

does that help?
[MB2]= Yes it does. =A0I don't necessarily think that is the case (i.e., that= we can no longer use the general B2BUA term). =A0You do have a higher leve= l point (which is maybe what you were getting at initially) as to whether S= TRAW must consider and document the handling of the new header defined by I= NSIPID. =A0If you read the STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific functions covered= are expected to relate to=A0already-published RFCs or existing RAI area wo= rk".
In this case, folks from INSIPID woul= d want to make sure that the WG deliverables in STRAW that identify the hea= ders that must be preserved include the INSIPID header. =A0 But, as usual, = I don't think there is lack of an overlap of participation that this is= a problem. And, related to this thread, that doesn't impact this docum= ent under discussion which only defines topologies and doesn't identify= any handling of headers. =A0 Personally, I think having STRAW work underwa= y at the same time as INSIPID will only improve interoperability for the IN= SIPID header. =A0 Without, STRAW, you'd be assuming that each type of B= 2BUA would do the right thing and preserve the header.=A0
[/MB2]

James




And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through= any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complica= ted, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the i= mpact.

[MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel), =A0H= adriel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and this doc= ument, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB]

James


At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi James,

The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA rol= es.

If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anythin= g preventing that.

Regards,

Christer

________________________________________
From: James Polk [<mailto:jmpolk@cisco.com>jmpolk@cisco.com]

Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM
To: Christer Holmberg; <mailto:straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org

Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of =A0draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-= taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>Content-Language: en-US
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>
>boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340= A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_"
>
>(As co-chair)
>
>Hi,
>
>Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/obj= ection
>for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.
>
>So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for
>adopting the draft. None has objected.

But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT)
about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in
INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting this draft yet.

James

>
>Regards,
>
>Christer
>
>Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft.
>
>From: <mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org>straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org<= u>] On

>Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
>Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14
>To: <mailto:stra= w@ietf.org>straw= @ietf.org

>Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00
>
>Hi,
>
>As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is<= br> >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.
>
>We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the
>different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.
>
>The only proposal on the table is:
><<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-s= traw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>h ttp://www.iet= f.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht t= p://<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw= -b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt


>
>Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a
>draft for the
>same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.
>
>Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base fo= r our
>delivery.
>
>Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the<= br> >list by Wednesday 12^th September.
>
>Regards,
>
>Christer & Victor (as chairs)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>straw mailing list
><mailto:straw@ie= tf.org>straw@= ietf.org

>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw
_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
<mailto:straw@ietf.o= rg>straw@= ietf.org

h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw


_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
<mailto:straw@ietf.o= rg>straw@= ietf.org

h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw


_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw


--bcaec54ee718e7a8ac04c99c9fb1-- From keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com Fri Sep 14 04:01:35 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F121521F84F8 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:01:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TnJSBuraViHj for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:01:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail6.alcatel.fr (smail6.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 102AA21F84AF for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.61]) by smail6.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id q8EB1EDF029986 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:01:24 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.44]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.61]) with mapi; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:01:20 +0200 From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" To: Mary Barnes , James Polk Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:01:19 +0200 Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: Ac2R/RtoGsh4wo1SQleoiU9t9lQVqwAaoIgQ Message-ID: References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE240D86C6DFRMRSSXCHMBSC3d_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.84 Cc: "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:01:35 -0000 --_000_EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE240D86C6DFRMRSSXCHMBSC3d_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My read is that INSIPID defines a SIP protocol mechanism. For protocol mechanisms already in existence, STRAW will give some idea of = what elements in the taxonomy can be expected to support in terms of transp= arency to SIP protocol mechanisms. For new protocol mechanisms, that responsibility will probably default to t= he working group defining the new protocol mechanism. My hope is that the former case applies to INSIPID. INSIPID will however need to take account of B2BUAs generically, and we are= already in a discussion of what is in scope and what is not in scope. Keith ________________________________ From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of M= ary Barnes Sent: 13 September 2012 23:14 To: James Polk Cc: straw@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-tax= onomy-00 - REMINDER On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James Polk > wrote: At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote: Comments below [MB]. Mary On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk <>jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: Christer I think you're misunderstanding my issue. I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating *which= * B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or use-case, pos= sibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in that WG. I thin= k STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different types of B2BUA= s - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any explanation wit= hin any draft or RFC going forward. [MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a discussio= n for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts this documen= t. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is. Rather, the= objective of this document is to characterize the different "flavors" of B= 2BUAs that are already deployed. The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to= describe desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB] IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity or= actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real detai= l exists to give more granular context. [MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] s/can/call does that help? [MB2] Yes it does. I don't necessarily think that is the case (i.e., that = we can no longer use the general B2BUA term). You do have a higher level p= oint (which is maybe what you were getting at initially) as to whether STRA= W must consider and document the handling of the new header defined by INSI= PID. If you read the STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific func= tions covered are expected to relate to already-published RFCs or existing = RAI area work". In this case, folks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG delive= rables in STRAW that identify the headers that must be preserved include th= e INSIPID header. But, as usual, I don't think there is lack of an overla= p of participation that this is a problem. And, related to this thread, tha= t doesn't impact this document under discussion which only defines topologi= es and doesn't identify any handling of headers. Personally, I think havi= ng STRAW work underway at the same time as INSIPID will only improve intero= perability for the INSIPID header. Without, STRAW, you'd be assuming that= each type of B2BUA would do the right thing and preserve the header. [/MB2] James And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through= any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complicated,= and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the impac= t. [MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel), Had= riel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and this docum= ent, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] James At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: Hi James, The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA rol= es. If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anything pr= eventing that. Regards, Christer ________________________________________ From: James Polk [>jmpolk@= cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM To: Christer Holmberg; >straw@= ietf.org Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-ta= xonomy-00 - REMINDER At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > >boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > >(As co-chair) > >Hi, > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >adopting the draft. None has objected. But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting this draft yet. James > >Regards, > >Christer > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > >From: >straw-= bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.= org] On >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >To: >straw@ietf.org >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > >Hi, > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > >The only proposal on the table is: ><h ttp://= www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht tp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-s= traw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >draft for the >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >delivery. > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > >Regards, > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >>straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw _______________________________________________ straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw _______________________________________________ straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw _______________________________________________ straw mailing list straw@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw --_000_EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE240D86C6DFRMRSSXCHMBSC3d_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My read is that INSIPID defines a SIP protocol mechanism.

 

For protocol mechanisms already in existence, STRAW will give some idea of what elements in the taxonomy can b= e expected to support in terms of transparency to SIP protocol mechanisms.

 

For new protocol mechanisms, that responsibility will probably default to the working group defining the new = protocol mechanism.

 

My hope is that the former case applie= s to INSIPID.

 

INSIPID will however need to take acco= unt of B2BUAs generically, and we are already in a discussion of what is in sco= pe and what is not in scope.

 

Keith

 

 

From:= straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mary Barnes
Sent: 13 September 2012 23:1= 4
To: James Polk
Cc: straw@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg
Subject: Re: [straw] Working= group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

 

 =

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:4= 2 PM, James Polk <jmpolk= @cisco.com> wrote:

At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote:

Comments below [M= B].

Mary

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:1= 5 PM, James Polk <<mailto:jmpolk@cisco.com>jmpolk@cisco.com>= wrote:
Christer

I think you're misunderstanding my issue.

I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating *which= * B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or use-case, possi= bly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in that WG. I think STRA= W is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any explanation within any draf= t or RFC going forward.

[MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a discussio= n for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts this document.  However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is. Rather, t= he objective of this document is to characterize the different "flavors&q= uot; of B2BUAs that are already deployed.  The idea behind the STRAW workgr= oup is to describe desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB]
IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real detail exists to give more granular context.

[MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB]


s/can/call

does that help?

[MB2] Yes it does= .  I don't necessarily think that is the case (i.e., that we can no long= er use the general B2BUA term).  You do have a higher level point (which is m= aybe what you were getting at initially) as to whether STRAW must consider and document the handling of the new header defined by INSIPID.  If you re= ad the STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific functions covered are expected to relate to already-published RFCs or existing RAI area work".

In this case, fol= ks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG deliverables in STRAW that iden= tify the headers that must be preserved include the INSIPID header.   But, = as usual, I don't think there is lack of an overlap of participation that this= is a problem. And, related to this thread, that doesn't impact this document u= nder discussion which only defines topologies and doesn't identify any handling = of headers.   Personally, I think having STRAW work underway at the same = time as INSIPID will only improve interoperability for the INSIPID header.  = ; Without, STRAW, you'd be assuming that each type of B2BUA would do the righ= t thing and preserve the header. 

[/MB2]


James




And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through= any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complicated, and = no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the impact.

[MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel),  Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and t= his document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB]

James


At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi James,

The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA rol= es.

If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anything preventing that.

Regards,

Christer

________________________________________

From: James Polk [<mailto:jmpolk@cisco.com>jmpolk@cisco.com]


Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 = PM

To: Christer Holmberg; <mailto:straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of  draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>Content-Language: en-US
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>
>boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCM= S0356e_"
>
>(As co-chair)
>
>Hi,
>
>Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection
>for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.
>
>So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for
>adopting the draft. None has objected.

But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT)
about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in
INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor
of adopting this draft yet.

James

>
>Regards,
>
>Christer
>
>Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft.
>

>From: <mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org>straw-bounces@ietf= .org [mailto:straw-b= ounces@ietf.org] On


>Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
>Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14

>To: <mailto:straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


>Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00
>
>Hi,
>
>As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is<= br> >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.
>
>We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the
>different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.
>
>The only proposal on the table is:

><<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-= 00.txt>h ttp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt<= /a>>ht tp://<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-= 00.txt>www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt<= /a>



>
>Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a
>draft for the
>same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so.
>
>Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >delivery.
>
>Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the<= br> >list by Wednesday 12^th September.
>
>Regards,
>
>Christer & Victor (as chairs)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>straw mailing list

><mailto:= straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw
_______________________________________________
straw mailing list

<mailto:stra= w@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw


_______________________________________________
straw mailing list

<mailto:stra= w@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw


_______________________________________________
straw mailing list
straw@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

 

 

--_000_EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE240D86C6DFRMRSSXCHMBSC3d_-- From christer.holmberg@ericsson.com Fri Sep 14 06:10:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D8E21F8528 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 06:10:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q62Jx0S8j3G9 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 06:10:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50C7621F8508 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 06:10:15 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7fea6d000002ccb-52-50532cb5a8bc Received: from esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 33.A5.11467.5BC23505; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:10:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.99]) by esessmw0247.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.93]) with mapi; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:10:14 +0200 From: Christer Holmberg To: Mary Barnes , James Polk Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:10:12 +0200 Thread-Topic: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER Thread-Index: Ac2R/RSZmYIgUzaDR42MvDSH9+vnBwAfOu3A Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A5981AD@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A5981ADESESSCMS0356e_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre42neAAg8+NbBY71hRafN6/n9ni VvNjVgdmjym/N7J67Jx1l91jyZKfTAHMUVw2Kak5mWWpRfp2CVwZJ3ZdYy74eoKx4tyTlWwN jOc3MHYxcnJICJhIPJ13DsoWk7hwbz0biC0kcIpRYv8Tsy5GLiB7AaNE27yDzF2MHBxsAhYS 3f+0QUwRAW+J++e1QcqZBVQlpjR3soLYLEB269KZYCOFBRIk/vxdyA5iiwgkSnT8/MEIYRtJ nL94CmwVr0C4xN65a1khVl1ilrg4axsLSIJTIFCip/kxM4jNCHTb91NrmCCWiUvcejKfCeJm AYkle84zQ9iiEi8f/2OFqBeVuNO+nhGiPl/i5asTLBDLBCVOznzCMoFRdBaSUbOQlM1CUgYR 15FYsPsTG4StLbFs4WtmGPvMgcdMyOILGNlXMQrnJmbmpJcb6qUWZSYXF+fn6RWnbmIExt/B Lb91dzCeOidyiFGag0VJnJcrab+/kEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYmDk6pBkb9Q3t3nV69 Q034cWGPaWLVwQv+H8388u/dZdF/dSq65JGwpKPnL5NN7zazrBQ6uezIBY1rUzLCfYPDnmQ3 p8e7btLf3b52z+qqwz7fv++OXPEqlbPJfWvirrliNQcvO/LVG929w7aIP6PyotrVydqH1u1w Uf3+KXpelEr3tWdLfm2ZmC+4aPoJJZbijERDLeai4kQA15nN840CAAA= Cc: "straw@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:10:20 -0000 --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A5981ADESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (As co-chair) Hi James, We can still use the general B2BUA term. There is no requirement that other= WGs must start to reference the specific B2BUA roles described in STRAW. W= e have a deliverable to describe the roles in STRAW, which we will need our= other STRAW deliverables. (Other WGs may of course reference the roles if they choose to.) So, based on the feedback on the list, the chairs' suggestion would be to r= equest adoption of the document as base for our delivery. And, as we all kn= ow, adopting a draft as base for a delivery does not mean we agree to all t= he text in the draft. Now, if you want to remove the whole deliverable from the charter, that is = a separate discussion. The current poll, however, is about adopting a draft= for an agreed deliverable. Last, in the case of INSIPID, I thought the whole idea was to specify a mec= hanism that is not impacted by B2BUAs. Regards, Christer From: Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com] Sent: 14. syyskuuta 2012 1:14 To: James Polk Cc: straw@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-tax= onomy-00 - REMINDER On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James Polk > wrote: At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote: Comments below [MB]. Mary On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk <>jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: Christer I think you're misunderstanding my issue. I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating *which= * B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or use-case, pos= sibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the work in that WG. I thin= k STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into several different types of B2BUA= s - for the whole community to _have_ to account for in any explanation wit= hin any draft or RFC going forward. [MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a discussio= n for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts this documen= t. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is. Rather, the= objective of this document is to characterize the different "flavors" of B= 2BUAs that are already deployed. The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to= describe desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB] IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any entity or= actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms where no real detai= l exists to give more granular context. [MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] s/can/call does that help? [MB2] Yes it does. I don't necessarily think that is the case (i.e., that = we can no longer use the general B2BUA term). You do have a higher level p= oint (which is maybe what you were getting at initially) as to whether STRA= W must consider and document the handling of the new header defined by INSI= PID. If you read the STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific func= tions covered are expected to relate to already-published RFCs or existing = RAI area work". In this case, folks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG delive= rables in STRAW that identify the headers that must be preserved include th= e INSIPID header. But, as usual, I don't think there is lack of an overla= p of participation that this is a problem. And, related to this thread, tha= t doesn't impact this document under discussion which only defines topologi= es and doesn't identify any handling of headers. Personally, I think havi= ng STRAW work underway at the same time as INSIPID will only improve intero= perability for the INSIPID header. Without, STRAW, you'd be assuming that= each type of B2BUA would do the right thing and preserve the header. [/MB2] James And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through= any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complicated,= and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the impac= t. [MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel), Had= riel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and this docum= ent, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] James At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: Hi James, The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA rol= es. If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see anything pr= eventing that. Regards, Christer ________________________________________ From: James Polk [>jmpolk@= cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM To: Christer Holmberg; >straw@= ietf.org Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-ta= xonomy-00 - REMINDER At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > >boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > >(As co-chair) > >Hi, > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >adopting the draft. None has objected. But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor of adopting this draft yet. James > >Regards, > >Christer > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > >From: >straw-= bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.= org] On >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >To: >straw@ietf.org >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > >Hi, > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > >The only proposal on the table is: ><h ttp://= www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht tp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-s= traw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >draft for the >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >delivery. > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > >Regards, > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >>straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw _______________________________________________ straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw _______________________________________________ straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw _______________________________________________ straw mailing list straw@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A5981ADESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

(As co-ch= air)

 

Hi James,

 

We can still use the general B2BUA term. There is no requirement that othe= r WGs must start to reference the specific B2BUA roles described in STRAW. = We have a deliverable to describe the roles in STRAW, which we will need ou= r other STRAW deliverables.

 

(Other WGs may o= f course reference the roles if they choose to.)

 

So, based on the feedback on the list, the chairs’ suggestion wou= ld be to request adoption of the document as base for our delivery. And, as= we all know, adopting a draft as base for a delivery does not mean we agre= e to all the text in the draft.

<= span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F= 497D'> 

Now, if you w= ant to remove the whole deliverable from the charter, that is a separate di= scussion. The current poll, however, is about adopting a draft for an agree= d deliverable.

 =

Last, in the case of INSIPID, = I thought the whole idea was to specify a mechanism that is not impacted by= B2BUAs.

 =

Regards,

 

Christer

 

 

From: Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com]
= Sent: 14. syyskuuta 2012 1:14
To: James Polk
Cc: st= raw@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg
Subject: Re: [straw] Working grou= p adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

 

 

O= n Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James Polk <jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote:

At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote:=

Comments below [MB].

Mar= y

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:1= 5 PM, James Polk <<mailto:jmpolk@cisco.com>jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote:
Christer

I think y= ou're misunderstanding my issue.

I think that INSIPID now doesn't ha= ve a choice in explicitly stating *which* B2BUA is involved in which scenar= io for each requirement or use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly = complicating the work in that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA = is into several different types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to _hav= e_ to account for in any explanation within any draft or RFC going forward.=

[MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a d= iscussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW adopts this= document.  However, I don't think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is= . Rather, the objective of this document is to characterize the different &= quot;flavors" of B2BUAs that are already deployed.  The idea behi= nd the STRAW workgroup is to describe desired behaviors that will improve i= nteroperability.[/MB]

IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be app= ropriate to can any entity or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most gene= ral terms where no real detail exists to give more granular context.
[MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB]

<= p class=3DMsoNormal>
s/can/call

does that help?

[MB2] Yes it does. &n= bsp;I don't necessarily think that is the case (i.e., that we can no longer= use the general B2BUA term).  You do have a higher level point (which= is maybe what you were getting at initially) as to whether STRAW must cons= ider and document the handling of the new header defined by INSIPID.  = If you read the STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific functions covered are expected to relate to al= ready-published RFCs or existing RAI area work".

In th= is case, folks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG deliverable= s in STRAW that identify the headers that must be preserved include the INS= IPID header.   But, as usual, I don't think there is lack of an overla= p of participation that this is a problem. And, related to this thread, tha= t doesn't impact this document under discussion which only defines topologi= es and doesn't identify any handling of headers.   Personally, I think= having STRAW work underway at the same time as INSIPID will only improve i= nteroperability for the INSIPID header.   Without, STRAW, you'd be ass= uming that each type of B2BUA would do the right thing and preserve the hea= der. 

[/MB2]


James




And s= ince INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive through any = version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is more complicated, and = no one from that WG has had a chance to digest or comment on the impact.
[MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to Hadriel),=  Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in INSIPID and = this document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB]

Ja= mes


At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi James,=

The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B= 2BUA roles.

If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I do= n't see anything preventing that.

Regards,

Christer

__= ______________________________________

From: James Polk [<mailto:jmpolk@cisco.com>jmpolk@cisco.com]


Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM

To: Christer Holmberg; <mailto:straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of  draft= -kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER

At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Ch= rister Holmberg wrote:
>Content-Language: en-US
>Content-Type: = multipart/alternative;
>
>boundary=3D"_000_7F2072F1E0DE894= DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_"
>
>(As co-chair= )
>
>Hi,
>
>Note, that today is the "deadline&= quot; for indicating support/objection
>for WG adoption of draft-kapl= an-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.
>
>So far only a couple of individu= als have indicated support for
>adopting the draft. None has objected= .

But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GM= T)
about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in=
INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favorof adopting this draft yet.

James

>
>Regards,
&g= t;
>Christer
>
>Ps. As individual, I support adopting the= draft.
>

>From: <mail= to:straw-bounce= s@ietf.org>straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On


>Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
>Sent: 5. syys= kuuta 2012 14:14

>To: <mailt= o:straw@ietf.org>= ;straw@ietf.org


>Subject: [straw] Working group= adoption of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00
>
>Hi,=
>
>As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the= charter is
>a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs.
&g= t;
>We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of th= e
>different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables.
= >
>The only proposal on the table is:

><<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ka= plan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>h ttp://www.ietf= .org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht tp://<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt= >www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonom= y-00.txt



>
>La= st week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a
>draf= t for the
>same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do= so.
>
>Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption= of
>draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base fo= r our
>delivery.
>
>Please indicate your support of, or o= bjection to, this proposal on the
>list by Wednesday 12^th September.=
>
>Regards,
>
>Christer & Victor (as chairs)>
>
>_______________________________________________
&g= t;straw mailing list

><mailt= o:straw@ietf.org>= ;straw@ietf.org


>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/li= stinfo/straw
_______________________________________________
stra= w mailing list

<mailto:straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org<= /p>


https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw=


_______________________________________________
straw ma= iling list

<mailto:straw@ietf.org>straw@ietf.org


https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

_______________________________________________
straw mailing = list
straw@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw

<= p class=3DMsoNormal> 

 

= --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A5981ADESESSCMS0356e_-- From jmpolk@cisco.com Fri Sep 14 12:42:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9F3D21F84D2 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:42:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AN9sM1epvXFh for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:42:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCE621F84B8 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:42:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9551; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347651760; x=1348861360; h=message-id:date:to:from:subject:cc:in-reply-to: references:mime-version; bh=NHYM36REaEEW6riOSpFUnBhFgtQnjKTBVjKFi+Gq/iM=; b=G17d/WiBHu+BovLoqmJLmmH/kqZAl+tMxGqHpNeZGkTQ4ljggAkaV0bd lNfsyi+x+LpLIZAx9P3R7FWhID77QIMiV7aEK5Tx/SYrtU3VkqaoF2HxU y3SveA6cdhYCh3tq8lfoG6baIjS+P9KJ80/vjBO3CqrcQo7qXJ7gcln6y s=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,424,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="55705373" Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Sep 2012 19:42:39 +0000 Received: from jmpolk-WS.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8715.cisco.com [10.99.80.22]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8EJgcxh019936; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:42:38 GMT Message-Id: <201209141942.q8EJgcxh019936@mtv-core-1.cisco.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:42:36 -0500 To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" , Mary Barnes , James Polk From: James Polk In-Reply-To: References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:42:41 -0000 At 06:01 AM 9/14/2012, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote: >My read is that INSIPID defines a SIP protocol mechanism. > >For protocol mechanisms already in existence, STRAW will give some >idea of what elements in the taxonomy can be expected to support in >terms of transparency to SIP protocol mechanisms. > >For new protocol mechanisms, that responsibility will probably >default to the working group defining the new protocol mechanism. > >My hope is that the former case applies to INSIPID. Christer & Mary I believe most of my angst about adopting the draft is the uneasiness and uncertainty about this last line above that Keith expressed. I'm concerned about INSIPID docs needed to move on the whim (word used mostly in jest) of a lateral WG. IOW - INSIPID docs will absolutely now have to define what a generic B2BUA is *because* of STRAW and readers of STRAW docs down the road. That's a fact IMO. Of more concern is whether or not INSIPID docs will have to articulate which type of B2BUA STRAW docs define whenever INSIPID docs use the initialism "B2BUA", including having to investigate whether or not how INSIPID docs use the term will be universally true for all instances or examples of _any_type_of_ B2BUA that STRAW happens to refer to. On the other hand, if INSIPID doesn't have to account for what STRAW defines, given that the two WGs are working at the same time, and not all INSIPID participants are participants of STRAW - I have far less issues with this taxonomy draft being adopted in STRAW. Bottom line - I don't want any author or editor of an INSIPID doc and work until a meeting, submit a draft at or near the deadline, and at the meeting have someone (or everyone) in the room say when they're presenting "you (generically) obviously haven't paid attention to what's happening in STRAW. Your preso is useless" and therefore cause an unnecessary delay to the INSIPID timelines. James > >INSIPID will however need to take account of B2BUAs generically, and >we are already in a discussion of what is in scope and what is not in scope. > >Keith > > > >---------- >From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On >Behalf Of Mary Barnes >Sent: 13 September 2012 23:14 >To: James Polk >Cc: straw@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg >Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER > > >On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James Polk ><jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: >At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote: >Comments below [MB]. > >Mary >On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk ><jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: >Christer > >I think you're misunderstanding my issue. > >I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating >*which* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or >use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the >work in that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into >several different types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to >_have_ to account for in any explanation within any draft or RFC going forward. > >[MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a >discussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW >adopts this document. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining >what a B2BUA is. Rather, the objective of this document is to >characterize the different "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already >deployed. The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to describe >desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB] > >IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any >entity or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms >where no real detail exists to give more granular context. > >[MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] > > >s/can/call > >does that help? >[MB2] Yes it does. I don't necessarily think that is the case >(i.e., that we can no longer use the general B2BUA term). You do >have a higher level point (which is maybe what you were getting at >initially) as to whether STRAW must consider and document the >handling of the new header defined by INSIPID. If you read the >STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific functions covered >are expected to relate to already-published RFCs or existing RAI area work". >In this case, folks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG >deliverables in STRAW that identify the headers that must be >preserved include the INSIPID header. But, as usual, I don't think >there is lack of an overlap of participation that this is a problem. >And, related to this thread, that doesn't impact this document under >discussion which only defines topologies and doesn't identify any >handling of headers. Personally, I think having STRAW work >underway at the same time as INSIPID will only improve >interoperability for the INSIPID header. Without, STRAW, you'd be >assuming that each type of B2BUA would do the right thing and >preserve the header. >[/MB2] > >James > > > >And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive >through any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is >more complicated, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest >or comment on the impact. > >[MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to >Hadriel), Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in >INSIPID and this document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] > >James > > >At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >Hi James, > >The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA roles. > >If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see >anything preventing that. > >Regards, > >Christer > >________________________________________ >From: James Polk [jmpolk@cisco.com] > >Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM >To: Christer Holmberg; >straw@ietf.org > >Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption >of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER > >At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: > >Content-Language: en-US > >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > > > >boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" > > > >(As co-chair) > > > >Hi, > > > >Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection > >for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. > > > >So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for > >adopting the draft. None has objected. > >But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) >about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in >INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor >of adopting this draft yet. > >James > > > > >Regards, > > > >Christer > > > >Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. > > > >From: > straw-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On > > >Behalf Of Christer Holmberg > >Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 > >To: straw@ietf.org > > >Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of > >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 > > > >Hi, > > > >As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is > >a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. > > > >We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the > >different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. > > > >The only proposal on the table is: > ><< > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>h > ttp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht > tp://<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt > > > > > >Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a > >draft for the > >same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. > > > >Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of > >draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our > >delivery. > > > >Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the > >list by Wednesday 12^th September. > > > >Regards, > > > >Christer & Victor (as chairs) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >straw mailing list > >straw@ietf.org > > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > >_______________________________________________ >straw mailing list >straw@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > > From gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com Tue Sep 18 03:07:13 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3FEE21F87DB for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:07:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.23 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BiId02hmj6xP for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D1A21F8464 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 03:07:11 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f046d00000644c-00-505847ce9b5d Received: from esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 71.89.25676.EC748505; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:07:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [131.160.36.73] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.82) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.264.1; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:07:10 +0200 Message-ID: <505847CD.5030801@ericsson.com> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:07:09 +0300 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Polk References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209122047.q8CKlLr3025615@mtv-core-3.cisco.com> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05853409FF2F7C@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <201209132115.q8DLFpiJ018419@mtv-core-2.cisco.com> <201209132142.q8DLgOdH026406@mtv-core-4.cisco.com> <201209141942.q8EJgcxh019936@mtv-core-1.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <201209141942.q8EJgcxh019936@mtv-core-1.cisco.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrHLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvre5594gAg/1v2Cx2rCm0eNp4ltHi 8/79zBa3mh+zOrB4tD7by+ox5fdGVo+ds+6yeyxZ8pMpgCWKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK+NoX2LB pbCKeb+dGxib3LsYOTkkBEwk2rZvYIewxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEkcIpR4v/Cv8wQzmpGialnn7KA VPEKaEscWT2bGcRmEVCVmHKhkxXEZhOwkNhy6z5YjahAsMS5jdvYIOoFJU7OfAIU5+AQEVCU ODK3GmQms8ABRolbBzqZQGqEBRIk/i6/CDZTSOA0i8TP/wkgNqeAvUTfg2XMENdJSryZfBNs PrOAnsSUqy2MELa8xPa3c6B6tSWWP2thmcAoNAvJ6llIWmYhaVnAyLyKUTg3MTMnvdxIL7Uo M7m4OD9Przh1EyMwzA9u+a26g/HOOZFDjNIcLErivNZb9/gLCaQnlqRmp6YWpBbFF5XmpBYf YmTi4JRqYOSvOpWrmc54f+Ln/tRSvVktgh0/3q27JHPsydbrX3dlLe5buPoRi6putbJVuK9E 1r+UDKc5z9hYNn6z5Hn99gz3iSSbW8dNonddnDpx0s4/jIsW9l0Rnr3bhjlrhrG9RxanYNpc hYbttoVLtNfsVz7u9VQ296mgzprwUxu2BuYm2vpc+9X8O0WJpTgj0VCLuag4EQAmUj4PQQIA AA== Cc: Mary Barnes , "DRAGE, Keith \(Keith\)" , "straw@ietf.org" , Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:07:13 -0000 Hi James, thanks for your cross-WG comments. It is always useful to have people looking at different parts of the RAI area. As you know, the actual scope of the INSIPID WG has been a central point in the discussions (that took place in DISPATCH) that led to the chartering of INSIPID and in the INSIPID session at the last IETF. One of the reasons for having a fairly narrow scope was not to have to deal with complex scenarios where different types of B2BUAs interact among them in complicated ways. >From the INSIPID charter: > This group will focus on a document that will specify a SIP > identifier that has the same aim as the From-tag, To-tag and Call-ID > conjunction, but is less likely to be mangled by intermediaries. So, answering your question, the limited-scope work that INSIPID is undertaking will not be affected by this taxonomy document. Of course, as you point out, the situation would be different if we were to charter a WG with a wider scope at some point in time. Cheers, Gonzalo On 14/09/2012 10:42 PM, James Polk wrote: > At 06:01 AM 9/14/2012, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote: >> My read is that INSIPID defines a SIP protocol mechanism. >> >> For protocol mechanisms already in existence, STRAW will give some >> idea of what elements in the taxonomy can be expected to support in >> terms of transparency to SIP protocol mechanisms. >> >> For new protocol mechanisms, that responsibility will probably >> default to the working group defining the new protocol mechanism. >> >> My hope is that the former case applies to INSIPID. > > Christer & Mary > > I believe most of my angst about adopting the draft is the uneasiness > and uncertainty about this last line above that Keith expressed. > > I'm concerned about INSIPID docs needed to move on the whim (word > used mostly in jest) of a lateral WG. IOW - INSIPID docs will > absolutely now have to define what a generic B2BUA is *because* of > STRAW and readers of STRAW docs down the road. That's a fact IMO. Of > more concern is whether or not INSIPID docs will have to articulate > which type of B2BUA STRAW docs define whenever INSIPID docs use the > initialism "B2BUA", including having to investigate whether or not > how INSIPID docs use the term will be universally true for all > instances or examples of _any_type_of_ B2BUA that STRAW happens to refer to. > > On the other hand, if INSIPID doesn't have to account for what STRAW > defines, given that the two WGs are working at the same time, and not > all INSIPID participants are participants of STRAW - I have far less > issues with this taxonomy draft being adopted in STRAW. > > Bottom line - I don't want any author or editor of an INSIPID doc and > work until a meeting, submit a draft at or near the deadline, and at > the meeting have someone (or everyone) in the room say when they're > presenting "you (generically) obviously haven't paid attention to > what's happening in STRAW. Your preso is useless" and therefore cause > an unnecessary delay to the INSIPID timelines. > > James > >> >> INSIPID will however need to take account of B2BUAs generically, and >> we are already in a discussion of what is in scope and what is not in scope. >> >> Keith >> >> >> >> ---------- >> From: straw-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of Mary Barnes >> Sent: 13 September 2012 23:14 >> To: James Polk >> Cc: straw@ietf.org; Christer Holmberg >> Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption of >> draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, James Polk >> <jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: >> At 04:26 PM 9/13/2012, Mary Barnes wrote: >> Comments below [MB]. >> >> Mary >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM, James Polk >> <jmpolk@cisco.com> wrote: >> Christer >> >> I think you're misunderstanding my issue. >> >> I think that INSIPID now doesn't have a choice in explicitly stating >> *which* B2BUA is involved in which scenario for each requirement or >> use-case, possibly (more like probably) greatly complicating the >> work in that WG. I think STRAW is redefining what a B2BUA is into >> several different types of B2BUAs - for the whole community to >> _have_ to account for in any explanation within any draft or RFC going forward. >> >> [MB] That was what I was asking yesterday, in which case that's a >> discussion for the INSIPID WG and shouldn't impact whether STRAW >> adopts this document. However, I don't think STRAW is redefining >> what a B2BUA is. Rather, the objective of this document is to >> characterize the different "flavors" of B2BUAs that are already >> deployed. The idea behind the STRAW workgroup is to describe >> desired behaviors that will improve interoperability.[/MB] >> >> IOW, with this draft, it will no longer be appropriate to can any >> entity or actor simply a B2BUA, except in the most general terms >> where no real detail exists to give more granular context. >> >> [MB] This sentence doesn't parse. [/MB] >> >> >> s/can/call >> >> does that help? >> [MB2] Yes it does. I don't necessarily think that is the case >> (i.e., that we can no longer use the general B2BUA term). You do >> have a higher level point (which is maybe what you were getting at >> initially) as to whether STRAW must consider and document the >> handling of the new header defined by INSIPID. If you read the >> STRAW charter, it implies such - i.e., "specific functions covered >> are expected to relate to already-published RFCs or existing RAI area work". >> In this case, folks from INSIPID would want to make sure that the WG >> deliverables in STRAW that identify the headers that must be >> preserved include the INSIPID header. But, as usual, I don't think >> there is lack of an overlap of participation that this is a problem. >> And, related to this thread, that doesn't impact this document under >> discussion which only defines topologies and doesn't identify any >> handling of headers. Personally, I think having STRAW work >> underway at the same time as INSIPID will only improve >> interoperability for the INSIPID header. Without, STRAW, you'd be >> assuming that each type of B2BUA would do the right thing and >> preserve the header. >> [/MB2] >> >> James >> >> >> >> And since INSIPID is all about defining something that will survive >> through any version of a B2BUA - the impact on INSIPID's work is >> more complicated, and no one from that WG has had a chance to digest >> or comment on the impact. >> >> [MB] As I stated in my email yesterday (which I also sent to >> Hadriel), Hadriel is an author of the WG requirements document in >> INSIPID and this document, so it would be good to hear his perspective. [/MB] >> >> James >> >> >> At 02:29 AM 9/13/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >> Hi James, >> >> The idea is to have a general document, which describes different B2BUA roles. >> >> If INSIPID sees value in referencing such document, I don't see >> anything preventing that. >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: James Polk [jmpolk@cisco.com] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:47 PM >> To: Christer Holmberg; >> straw@ietf.org >> >> Subject: Re: [straw] Working group adoption >> of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 - REMINDER >> >> At 07:22 AM 9/12/2012, Christer Holmberg wrote: >>> Content-Language: en-US >>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >>> >>> boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A53BB74ESESSCMS0356e_" >>> >>> (As co-chair) >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Note, that today is the "deadline" for indicating support/objection >>> for WG adoption of draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. >>> >>> So far only a couple of individuals have indicated support for >>> adopting the draft. None has objected. >> >> But... someone did ask an important question (Sept 6th at 19:28 GMT) >> about the relationship between these different B2BUAs and the work in >> INSIPID that no one has answered, so barring that - I'm not in favor >> of adopting this draft yet. >> >> James >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Christer >>> >>> Ps. As individual, I support adopting the draft. >>> >>> From: >> straw-bounces@ietf.org >> [mailto:straw-bounces@ietf.org] On >> >>> Behalf Of Christer Holmberg >>> Sent: 5. syyskuuta 2012 14:14 >>> To: straw@ietf.org >> >>> Subject: [straw] Working group adoption of >>> draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As mentioned last week, our first scheduled delivery in the charter is >>> a taxonomy document defining role-types of B2BUAs. >>> >>> We believe that having a common understanding and agreement of the >>> different B2BUA roles is essential for our other deliverables. >>> >>> The only proposal on the table is: >>> << >> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>h >> ttp://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>ht >> tp://<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt>www.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.txt >> >> >>> >>> Last week we did ask whether someone else is planning to submit a >>> draft for the >>> same delivery, but nobody has indicated an intention to do so. >>> >>> Therefore, we would now like to ask the WG for adoption of >>> draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00, and to make it the base for our >>> delivery. >>> >>> Please indicate your support of, or objection to, this proposal on the >>> list by Wednesday 12^th September. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Christer & Victor (as chairs) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> straw mailing list >>> straw@ietf.org >> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >> _______________________________________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> straw mailing list >> straw@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > straw mailing list > straw@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/straw > > From christer.holmberg@ericsson.com Tue Sep 25 04:16:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: straw@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EFA721F84CE for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 04:16:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.113 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0V-3xThYTP4h for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 04:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E82121F84CF for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 04:16:39 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7fea6d000002ccb-bc-5061928d7f80 Received: from esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 6B.B8.11467.D8291605; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:16:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.99]) by esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se ([10.2.3.53]) with mapi; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:16:29 +0200 From: Christer Holmberg To: "straw@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:16:28 +0200 Thread-Topic: Declaration: Rough consensus on adopting draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 Thread-Index: Ac2bDvbE1/4lGLhTRxK88/ckk9suIA== Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A6A279D@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A6A279DESESSCMS0356e_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW7vpMQAgyNrlC1uNT9mdWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxtVZPYwFLRIVLxuOsDYwnhTtYuTkkBAwkfjWdIYJwhaTuHBv PVsXIxeHkMApRomjy5+xgiSEBOYwShzfzN7FyMHBJmAh0f1PGyQsIqAqMeHLTUYQmwXI/jhj B1i5sECExKOJZ5khamIlXq55wwph60ks3nGaBcTmFQiXeLjvJ1gNI9De76fWgN3ALCAucevJ fKh7BCSW7DnPDGGLSrx8/I8Vol5U4k77ekaQc5gF8iWWvIyDGCkocXLmE5YJjEKzkEyahVA1 C0kVRImOxILdn9ggbG2JZQtfM8PYZw48ZkIWX8DIvopRODcxMye93FAvtSgzubg4P0+vOHUT IzASDm75rbuD8dQ5kUOM0hwsSuK8XEn7/YUE0hNLUrNTUwtSi+KLSnNSiw8xMnFwSjUwsn4S yWn58v9B5Uvb+uuTjTz7inPEXl6S+nTsa8KcRbve/GoQ7/Ew/9RzQOTdi22u1o+s08Qze5yM Dk8Um5K0qVlswY5b2/JNZrZ5+nFO0b1n/DEzbhrj28/zhLcGd//3bCoSTNuleWlyQlh7eu7a OYF7+bdWP5evSdTKb/yWe9O75YDktu9sSizFGYmGWsxFxYkAzpUyN1ICAAA= Subject: [straw] Declaration: Rough consensus on adopting draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00 X-BeenThere: straw@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Sip Traversal Required for Applications to Work \(STRAW\) working group discussion list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:16:40 -0000 --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A6A279DESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [As co-chair] Hi, Based on the feedback, and discussions with the AD, the chairs hereby decla= re rough consensus on adopting draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00. We request the author to submit a draft-straw-00 version of the draft. Thank You! Regards, Christer --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A6A279DESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

[As co-chair]

 

= Hi,

 

Based on the feedback, and discussions with the AD, the chairs hereby= declare rough consensus on adopting draft-kaplan-straw-b2bua-taxonomy-00.<= o:p>

 

We request the author to submit a draft-straw-00 version of the draft.

 

= Thank You!

 

Regards,

 <= /p>

Christer

&n= bsp;

= --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585340A6A279DESESSCMS0356e_--