Re: FW: review of draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-05.txt

Folks,

I am a bit confused.

Perhaps other working group participants can clarify a few things?


SH>  Here's the comments from Scott Brim about the refs I promised you.
SH> It depends at least on RFCs 2305, 2532, and 3297, and
SH> draft-ietf-fax-esmtp-conneg-10.txt, which Joel reviewed.  2305 is
SH> currently being revised (draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-05.txt).  2532 is
SH> unassigned but a look at the 2305 replacement draft leads me to suspect
SH> that it will be revised after 2305.  You saw Joel's review.

Although I can see the service-v2-05 draft, I was not aware of an
effort to replace 2305.  In addition, that Internet-Draft is 2 years
old.  As far as I am aware, RFC2305 is the correct reference for the
basic facsimile profile and it is not due for change.  Is this
incorrect?


SH> What do you want to do with these dependencies?  Personally I would hold
SH> off on this draft until those it depends on so heavily are dealt with.

Given that the FFPIM document is intended to synthesize the highest
level of facsimile profiling of email, I think it essential that it
incorporate (cite) all relevant specifications.



d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:[email protected]>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>