Re: RE: [Geopriv] Consensus on changes to location-conveyance
Andrew Newton <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip,gmane.ietf.geopriv |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Jul 27, 2006, at 12:08 AM, James M. Polk wrote: > At 11:37 PM 7/26/2006 -0400, Andrew Newton wrote: > >> On Jul 26, 2006, at 11:27 PM, James M. Polk wrote: >> >>> I think Geopriv really needs to look at HTTP as a RFC 3693 "using >>> protocol" to tease out any unique characteristics with that >>> protocol. That discussion and review shouldn't bog this document >>> down. Does this sound fair? >> >> Most definitely. We've had discussions on HTTP as a using protocol >> for 3 years in GEOPRIV, HELD being the latest incarnation. The first >> proposals ran into serious privacy concerns. Anything that simply >> says "use HTTP" is an attempt to work around answering the serious >> privacy concerns raised in GEOPRIV. > > is this said with your WG chair hat on? > > It sounds pretty definitive to these ears... I don't believe working group chairs are given any special powers that such a decision is in their hands. Any individual participant can approach an AD or the IESG either informally or via appeal about attempts to work around working group consensus. Such things are taken seriously by the IESG, to the point that they can stop the publication of an RFC sent directly to the RFC Editor on this basis. -andy _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.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