At 02:59 PM 7/18/2008, Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) wrote:
>Jul 2007 Location Conveyance with SIP to IESG > -- Waiting on face-to-face, but in GEOPRIV This one is interesting: I believe that it was not a good idea to have the document in SIP when most of the controversial discussions happen in GEOPRIV, i.e. the encoding wasn't been the problem -- the semantic was.
yeah *but* there is thing about the ID that creates new SIP headers, and header parameters and a new response code... that makes it be in SIP, according to an existing RFC (4485 I think)
Spreading topics over different groups always makes the process more complicated. Ciao Hannes PS: I also have to add that GEOPRIV clearly isn't the easiest group I have dealt with. Hence, the delay is probably not so surprising. _______________________________________________ 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