Pls review documents on IESG Agenda for April 25, 2005

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

MIB Doctors,

As always, I would appreciate your review comments,
specifically if there are any from a NM perspective.

Please note that this time the IESG telechat is on 
Monday April 25th, so I need feedback (if any) at the 
latest on Monday noon (European time).

Thanks, Bert
----------- documents on IESG agenda for April 25th:
                                                                                
2. Protocol Actions
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a
	reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet
	infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?"


2.1 WG Submissions
2.1.1 New Item
  o draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vmr-wb-10.txt
    Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP) Payload Formats for the Variable-Rate 
    Multimode Wideband (VMR-WB) Audio Codec (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 5 
    Note: PROTO Shepherd magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com 
    Token: Allison Mankin
  o draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-02.txt
    Mapping Between the Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) and Internet Mail 
    (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 5 
    Token: Ted Hardie
  o draft-ietf-lemonade-notify-s2s-00.txt
    Server To Server Notification Protocol Requirements (Proposed Standard) - 3 
    of 5 
    Token: Ted Hardie
  o draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2-10.txt
    Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 5 
    Token: Bert Wijnen
  o draft-ietf-avt-rtp-amrwbplus-06.txt
    RTP Payload Format for Extended AMR Wideband (AMR-WB+) Audio Codec 
    (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 5 
    Note: PROTO shepherd: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> 
    Token: Allison Mankin

2.1.2 Returning Item
NONE

2.2 Individual Submissions
2.2.1 New Item
  o draft-josefsson-dns-url-11.txt
    Domain Name System Uniform Resource Identifiers (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 
    5 
    Token: Ted Hardie
  o draft-rescorla-dtls-04.txt
    Datagram Transport Layer Security (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 5 
    Token: Russ Housley
  o draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt
    Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures (BCP) - 3 of 5 
    Token: Scott Hollenbeck
  o draft-lee-ipsec-cipher-seed-01.txt
    The SEED Cipher Algorithm and Its Use With IPSec (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 
    5 
    Token: Russ Housley
  o draft-hoffman-telnet-uri-04.txt
    The telnet URI Scheme (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 5 
    Token: Ted Hardie

2.2.2 Returning Item
NONE

3. Document Actions

3.1 WG Submissions
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable
	contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
	not, what changes would make it so?"

3.1.1 New Item
NONE
3.1.2 Returning Item
  o draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-threats-03.txt
    Threats relating to IPv6 multihoming solutions (Informational) - 1 of 1 
    Token: David Kessens


3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable
	contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
	not, what changes would make it so?"

3.2.1 New Item
  o draft-dtessman-urn-namespace-federated-content-01.txt
    URN Namespace for Federated Content (Informational) - 1 of 2 
    Note: RFC Editor note: Rules for Lexical Equivalence: Aa Aa Aa In addition 
    to the rules defined in RFC 2141 [4], normalize the. Aa Aa Aa case of the 
    ProviderId before comparison. Rules for Lexical Equivalence: Aa Aa Aa In 
    addition to the rules defined in RFC 2141 [4], normalize the. Aa Aa Aa case 
    of the ProviderId to lower case before comparison. 
    Token: Ted Hardie
  o draft-dolan-urn-isan-00.txt
    ISAN URN Definition (Informational) - 2 of 2 
    Token: Ted Hardie

3.2.2 Returning Item
NONE
3.3 Individual Submissions Via RFC Editor
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Does this document
	represent an end run around the IETF's working groups
	or its procedures? Does this document present an incompatible
	change to IETF technologies as if it were compatible?" Other
	matters may be sent to the RFC Editor in private review.

3.3.1 New Item
NONE
3.3.2 Returning Item
NONE