10 minutes on the phone number dichotomy thing isn't going to be even close enough to cut it. It should be either zero or a more significant number.
We have 30 minutes on media security. The only chartered item there is the requiremetns document which I thought was mostly done. Why is there so much time dedicated to this? I would rather move that to INFO or the identity mess. -Jonathan R. Dean Willis wrote: > Keith and I just spent the past three hours revising the agenda for > SIP at IETF 71. > > It's very full, and we are not going to have time to discuss > everything we need to discuss -- we have only 2.5 hours this time. > > Please take a look at: > > http://www.softarmor.com/mediawiki/index.php/SIP_Agenda_IETF_71 > > (no, I'm not trying to send the MHTML by cut-and-paste again given > what happened last time). > > and see if you have any suggestions. Remember, we're supposed to > concentrate on the chartered working items first (that's the purpose > of having a charter). > > Depending on what we decide about discussing session policies, I can > see adding that time slice to the INFO discussion. But since we've > only got 10 minutes for INFO and I can't see resolving that furball in > 25 minutes, it doesn't help much. > > -- > Dean > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip > -- Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 499 Thornall St. Cisco Fellow Edison, NJ 08837 Cisco, Voice Technology Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (408) 902-3084 http://www.cisco.com _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
