Re: [Sip] Let's talk about a Dublin agenda

["Elwell, John" <john.elwell at siemens.com>]

Those overlaps would work for me.

John 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Hadriel Kaplan
> Sent: 24 June 2008 21:46
> To: Dean Willis; sip at ietf.org
> Cc: Keith Drage
> Subject: Re: [Sip] Let's talk about a Dublin agenda
> 
> 
> Oy vey.  That's less time than we had in Philly, and we got 
> barely anything done there.
> 
> Why can't some RAI groups overlap - for example mediactrl or 
> xcon at the same time as speermint or drinks, or let p2psip 
> overlap with any of those 4?
> 
> -hadriel
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Dean
> > Willis
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:20 PM
> > To: sip at ietf.org
> > Cc: Keith Drage
> > Subject: [Sip] Let's talk about a Dublin agenda
> >
> >
> > I've been tipped off that we may be down to as little as 
> two hours (or
> > maybe 2.5)  of meeting time in Dublin due to additional WG and BOF
> > events that didn't make it onto the earlier published agenda (like
> > MEDIACTRL).
> >
> > What are the absolutely most important things we need to talk about?
> > What is the best possible use of our very valuable and very scarce
> > time together?
> >
> > I suspect that going by-rote through the list of open milestones is
> > not the best use of our time.
> >
> > Topics that I think we might want to talk about include but are not
> > limited to:
> >
> > Agenda bash and announcements usually use 10 minutes
> >
> > 1) Using SAML for SIP.
> > -- Milestone was Dec. 2007
> > -- Author has promised new rev before meeting
> > -- Is the WG committed to doing this work?
> > -- 10 minutes?
> >
> > 2) Test Matrix for SIP to Draft Standard
> > -- Milestone was Feb 2008
> > -- How are we going to move forward?
> > -- 10 minutes
> >
> > 3) Delivery of Request URI and Parameters to UAS Through Proxy
> > -- Milestone was Feb 2008
> > -- Conversation has lagged. Do we see a workable solution?
> > -- 30 minutes?
> >
> > 4) DTLS-SRTP
> > -- Milestone was Feb 2008
> > -- Delayed by the RFC 4474/Gateway/B2BUA
> > -- Decide: Do we hold DTLS-SRTP or publish with a caveat?
> > -- EKR may not be attending, can we resolve on-list? (no time?)
> >
> > 5) Mechanisms for UA Initiated Privacy
> > -- Milestone is July 2008
> > -- Author has promised new rev before meeting
> > -- 20 minutes?
> >
> > 6) Termination of early Dialog Prior to Final Response (199)
> > -- Milestone is November 2008
> > -- Substantial list activity
> > -- 30 minutes?
> >
> > 7) Guidelines for SIP Extension Modalities
> > -- No milestone
> > -- Needs conceptual discussion
> > -- Defer until #8 below is resolved? (no time?)
> >
> > 8) The INFO solution and Paul's compromise for historical 
> registration
> > -- No milestone
> > -- Previous WG consensus to "do something"
> > -- 40 minutes?
> >
> >
> > Am I missing something that is critically important?
> >
> > Which topics do we really need to talk about in order to 
> move forward?
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> > Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
> > Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
> Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
> 
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip