OMA BCAST liaison reply

Folks,
please find below my proposal for a reply liaison to OMA BCAST.  Now  
bash it up :-), but remember: they asked for a reply by 23.03.07,  
which is this Friday
Stephan


> From: IETF RMT WG
> To:   OMA BCAST
> Re:   OMA-LS_0166-BCAST_to_IETF_Layered_Coding_Transport-20070215-A
>
> Dear OMA BCAST,
>
> The IETF RMT WG thanks OMA BCAST for the liaison statement on
> Layered Coding Transport, dated on 8 Feb 2007. We have
> discussed the questions and our answers are as follows:
>
> Question #1 (by OMA BCAST)
> Does IETF RMT consider the revision of LCT building block
> stable enough so that we can refer to that in OMA BCAST 1.0
> specification?
>
> Answer #1 (by IETF RMT)
> IETF RMT considers the revised LCT specification (currently in
> the state of an Internet-Draft) to be sufficiently stable for
> reference by OMA BCAST. Once the specification has been
> published as a Proposed Standard, we suggest OMA BCAST could
> update the reference to point to the RFC.
>
> Question #2 (by OMA BCAST)
> What is estimated schedule for revising the RMT RFCs on the
> Standards Track?
>
> Answer #2 (by IETF RMT)
> For all of its Experimental RFCs, the IETF RMT WG has created
> associated Internet-Drafts, intended for future publication as
> Standards Track RFCs.  The core technology in these drafts
> closely reflects the respective Experimental RFCs, and no
> major changes are to be expected.  These drafts, at present,
> are being updated predominantly in the sections pertaining to
> security considerations and congestion control considerations,
> as mandated by the IESG.  This work also has progressed far
> enough to make us believe that we can request publication for
> many, if not all, of the documents by this May.
>
> We hope our answers provide you with the guidance you are
> seeking. If you have further question on these matters, please
> do not hesitate to return to us.
>
> IETF RMT WG
>