Subject: [Enum] Its that time again .... Agenda Items for IETF Vancouver

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:52:44 -0400

I currently aware of two new drafts coming through pretty soon.

No I do not know what slot we are going to get.

One on an ENUM API and a enum registration document for vcard.

Obviously we have the recharter issues to deal with when our esteemed 
AD's respond ot the Chair's proposal etc.

Anything else?

-- 

Richard Shockey, Director - Member of Technical Staff
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza  -   Sterling, VA  20166
sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org   sip:57141(at)fwd.pulver.com
ENUM +87810-13313-31331
PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile +1 703.593.2683
Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or 
<mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz>
<http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

---

From: lconroy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 11:48:26 +0100

Hi There Richard, folks,

Fujiwara-san and I will be issuing the updated Experiences draft  
shortly.

 From the discussions on (and off) list, I will ALSO be issuing (with  
Jim Reid) a companion document - this is a "single issue" Standards  
Track draft mandating EDNS0 support for entities claiming to be  
involved in ENUM resolution.
It will be similar to RFC3226, which did a similar job for entities  
claiming to support DNSSEC/A6/IPv6/...

In principle, one CAN put requirements into an Informational document  
(as the experiences draft is intended), but it may be simpler to  
split out the "real" MUSTs into a separate Standards-track document -  
it is important that this be processed as quickly as possible, so  
that implementors can incorporate it (potential customers can specify  
it :).

Once that is out, I would greatly appreciate it if the group could  
think on't, and I would like it if this were to be considered for  
adoption as a WG draft.

(This new "ENUM-EDNS0" draft is the sole reason for the delay in  
shipping the experiences draft - apologies to all for this).

all the best,
   Lawrence

On 5 Oct 2005, at 16:52, Richard Shockey wrote:
> Obviously we have the recharter issues to deal with when our  
> esteemed AD's respond ot the Chair's proposal etc.
>
> Anything else?
>
> --

---

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 08:54:13 -0400

Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:

> Richard,
> we're going to update/rename our ENUM validation related documents, as 
> the working group has agreed to promote them to WG items in Paris. The 
> following documents are going to be updated (most probably today):
>
> draft-mayrhofer-enum-validation-arch -> draft-ietf-enum-validation-arch
> draft-lendl-enum-validation-token -> draft-ietf-enum-validation-token
> draft-ietf-enum-validation-epp  (already WG item)
>
> (given that the esteemed WG chairs approve the file names, of course)
>
> We have just done minor modifications to those documents - however, 
> we'd appreciate a short slot to ask for feedback and how to proceed.
>
sound fine to me ...

> cheers
> Alex Mayrhofer
> enum.at

--