[12:02:03] --- LOGGING STARTED
[15:23:37] --- ttfr has joined
[15:24:17] --- frodek has joined
[15:26:05] --- maltarai has joined
[15:26:29] --- davidbryan@gmail.com has joined
[15:26:41] --- eburger has joined
[15:26:58] --- bewo has joined
[15:28:35] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert presenting documents published/in queue/IESG/AD eval/WGLC
[15:29:27] <davidbryan@gmail.com> presentation: draft-niemi-simple-chat-05
[15:30:09] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Will ask on list if this should be persued
[15:30:41] <davidbryan@gmail.com> draft-garcia-simple-presence-dictionary-00. Here or in OMA. Miguel looking for help.
[15:31:06] --- maltarai has left
[15:32:59] --- isudo has joined
[15:33:56] <davidbryan@gmail.com> JDR presenting
[15:34:20] --- cullenfluffyjennings@gmail.com has joined
[15:34:27] --- ysuzuki has joined
[15:35:29] --- rkbowen has joined
[15:35:34] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Do we need to spend cycles on these two documents?
[15:36:15] <davidbryan@gmail.com> (oops...btw these are pres-policy-caps and common-policy-caps)
[15:36:43] --- miki has joined
[15:37:24] <davidbryan@gmail.com> JDR/Henning: Possibly more complicated than worth.
[15:39:22] --- bhoeneis has joined
[15:42:46] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Henning: Try to discourage random subset implementations. If we use it at all, ability to convey what it is that we do.
[15:43:32] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Discussion of putting this into separate namespace
[15:43:56] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: general discussion of not needing it, one statement of "lets do it in case dsomeone else does something we don't want"
[15:44:07] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: Is there a compelling need? Hum please:
[15:44:11] <davidbryan@gmail.com> no hum at all
[15:45:06] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Strong hum to not continue using
[15:45:56] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Keith: others may rely on this -- will be examined on list
[15:46:00] <davidbryan@gmail.com> in 3gpp
[15:47:05] <davidbryan@gmail.com> New topic: Presence Processing Model, JDR
[15:47:12] --- bewo has left
[15:48:35] --- ttfr has left: Replaced by new connection
[15:51:48] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Do we need? Is the priority high enough?
[15:52:28] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Jonathan proposes pushing off until people are having trouble implementing.
[15:52:58] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Comments that bandwidth, composite are main problems
[15:53:19] <davidbryan@gmail.com> this isn't showing up and is thus less important
[15:53:31] <davidbryan@gmail.com> (Marcus)
[15:53:59] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Proposal to move this to an informational
[15:56:05] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Paul K.: Do we care how composition works?
[15:58:04] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Henning: Feels we have too many overview documents. Perhaps useful as a normative document
[15:58:18] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: may be a source for the normative arch. document
[16:00:12] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Hisham as contributor: Need running code, otherwise this guesswork. Need the code before we know if this is useful
[16:01:36] --- lebb has joined
[16:02:07] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: use appropriate parts when spinning effort for overview draft. Left overs can be put in BCP if useful. Consensus is that not good for a working item.
[16:02:31] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: will mine, not pursue normative document
[16:02:50] --- fenton has joined
[16:04:24] --- xmlscott has joined
[16:04:54] <davidbryan@gmail.com> 3GP liason: The cap documents may be required.
[16:05:38] <davidbryan@gmail.com> New presentation: Henning: composing presence
[16:08:19] --- fenton has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:09:19] --- eburger has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:09:21] --- davidbryan@gmail.com has left
[16:09:34] --- cullenfluffyjennings@gmail.com has left
[16:13:17] --- davidbryan@gmail.com has joined
[16:13:20] --- rkbowen has left
[16:14:54] --- davidbryan@gmail.com has left
[16:17:50] --- frodek has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:23:23] --- bhoeneis has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:23:32] --- davidbryan@gmail.com has joined
[16:23:55] <davidbryan@gmail.com> ...network at IETF bad...scribe will be at best intermittent...
[16:23:59] --- isudo has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:24:04] --- isudo has joined
[16:24:24] --- xmlscott has left
[16:24:57] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Topic: IM requirements, Markus Isomaki
[16:26:53] --- fenton has joined
[16:27:02] --- ysuzuki has left
[16:28:52] --- miki has left
[16:30:28] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Why push this work to RFC or simply as a WG document to help make sure things are not forgotten
[16:30:38] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: scratch pad to be sure that everything is done
[16:32:00] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Dean: OMA is really hopeing for a simple chat
[16:33:15] <davidbryan@gmail.com> New topic: IMDN
[16:33:42] --- miki has joined
[16:35:34] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Henning: Referring to should: is this implementation should or a transmission shoul?
[16:36:04] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Ben: Privacy concern: nodes may not want to respond
[16:36:20] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Henning: not a should in the "optional" sense
[16:39:43] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Eric Burger: Message IDs are usful in many places for IM
[16:39:47] <davidbryan@gmail.com> this is just one possible place
[16:43:09] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Allowing sender to invoke the required to see if they support IMDN
[16:43:30] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Ben Campbell: don't allow required tag. CPIM allows arbitrarily
[16:43:51] --- ysuzuki has joined
[16:44:53] <davidbryan@gmail.com> issue: being able to change CPIM header. Is this an issue for end-to-end encyption?
[16:45:18] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Ben: If encrypted, intermediary doesn't see them, may be a non-issue
[16:46:30] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Miguel, then Robert: if signed, how does this effect things? Maybe list discussion item
[16:46:52] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Conclusion from Robert: discuss on list about how things are signed.
[16:47:08] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Cullen: ensure this is explained well in final version how decision was made
[16:48:46] <davidbryan@gmail.com> next: SIMPLE Problem statement
[16:50:00] --- fenton has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:50:58] --- frodek has joined
[16:56:51] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Conclusion: many messages, feels that WG needs to improve optimization
[16:58:14] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Henning: big provider working with them implies that others have this problem too. Are there models that we can follow to reduce this?
[17:01:37] <davidbryan@gmail.com> JDR: Good work, glad to see this quantified. Need to see what we can do that would be better. What is the best possible? Interdomain may be the biggest places for SIMPLE.
[17:01:45] <davidbryan@gmail.com> If so, need to resolve this issue
[17:02:30] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Ben: May need more analysis before requirements. If we go down the path.
[17:03:19] --- miki has left
[17:03:35] --- stpeter has joined
[17:03:59] <davidbryan@gmail.com> dean: It is realistic to have large number of watchers
[17:04:01] --- frodek has left
[17:04:37] <stpeter> BTW, I got pulled out to provide some feedback within the Sieve WG session, I shall return
[17:09:37] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: discussion of rechartering
[17:10:50] --- stpeter has left: Replaced by new connection
[17:12:20] --- stpeter has joined
[17:16:07] --- miki has joined
[17:20:06] <davidbryan@gmail.com> Robert: Hum on should we refine the problem statement document into an info RFC
[17:20:14] <davidbryan@gmail.com> consensus yes
[17:20:17] <davidbryan@gmail.com> meeting closed
[17:20:22] --- davidbryan@gmail.com has left: Logged out
[17:20:28] --- miki has left
[17:20:35] --- frodek has joined
[17:22:27] --- isudo has left
[17:22:35] --- ysuzuki has left
[17:22:52] --- stpeter has left
[17:23:40] --- isudo has joined
[17:23:43] --- isudo has left
[17:27:01] --- ysuzuki has joined
[17:31:43] --- isudo has joined
[17:33:34] --- isudo has left
[17:37:09] --- ysuzuki has left
[17:40:07] --- frodek has left: Replaced by new connection