Re: [Speermint] draft-hancock-sip-interconnect-guidelines

["Venkatesh Venkataramanan (venkatev)" <venkatev at cisco.com>]

I echo this sentiment as well... I think there is definite value in this
draft. However, I think it's focus should be on "inter-connects" and
issues around it rather than "features" itself. 

Thanks,
Venkatesh

-----Original Message-----
From: speermint-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:speermint-bounces at ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Theo Zourzouvillys
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:45 AM
To: Elwell, John
Cc: speermint at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Speermint] draft-hancock-sip-interconnect-guidelines

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Elwell, John
<john.elwell at siemens-enterprise.com> wrote:
> By all means charter a work item, but I would prefer to see a further 
> revision that takes into account the feedback from today's meeting, in

> particular making it less prescriptive, before adopting the draft as a

> working group document in fulfilment of the charter item.

I would like to echo this sentiment.

... I have no objection in the general goals of it, but i strongly
believe it should be focusing at the lower levels and general
*interconnect*/hop-by-hop stuff - things such as supporting TCP, mutual
TLS, NAPTR, overload control, etc rather than the endpoint requirements
to flow across those interfaces.


~ Theo
_______________________________________________
Speermint mailing list
Speermint at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speermint