Subject: [dispatch] Discussion venue for 666 (was SHAKEN but not STIRred means 666 can cause collateral damage)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 17:27:01 +0900

[as SIPCORE chair]

On 11/17/16 10:14, Brian Rosen wrote:
> I’ve sent this to stir, even though it has not been decided where the 666 draft will land

My understanding coming out of DISPATCH is that 666 is appropriate for 
SIPCORE, assuming the new charter is approved by the IESG. I expect the 
proposed charter changes to be uncontroversial.

Based on the foregoing, we (the SIPCORE chairs) think it would be 
appropriate to hold general discussion of both of the
draft-schulzrinne-dispatch-callinfo-spam and 
draft-schulzrinne-dispatch-status-unwanted documents on the SIPCORE list.

I've copied DISPATCH and SIPCORE on this message, and set followups to 
SIPCORE.

/a

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 17:51:52 +0900

[as a STIR co-chair]

I agree with this.

Later in the discussion, I expect we will recommend splitting the 
passport extension work out and running that through STIR, but that 
doesn't need to happen immediately.

If we discover that there's frequent unnatural tension in needing to 
talk about stir things while figuring out the SIP mechanics in these 
drafts, we can revisit.

RjS

On 11/17/16 5:27 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> SIPCORE, assuming the new charter is approved by the IESG. I expect 
> the proposed charter changes to be uncontroversial.
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch