RE: RFC Editor: Fast Tracking Request

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

Allison... are you aware that in the case of the ASON specs
in early Jan, that ITU SG15 in fact accepted that we would 
point them to an approved I-D? It was not easy for them,
but they did accept it and live with it when we told them
that we would not give out rfc-numbers.

Just so you know.

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allison Mankin [mailto:mankin@psg.com]
> Sent: woensdag 7 mei 2003 0:23
> To: iesg@ietf.org
> Subject: FWD: RFC Editor: Fast Tracking Request
> 
> 
> IESG,
> 
> Here's a request for RFC Fast Tracking that went a little 
> differently than
> usual, but better to know ahead of time that the RFC-Editor 
> is willing to
> give numbers in this case.  When I saw it at first, I thought 
> it was a problem
> because there was unlikely to be time for the large drafts to 
> have expedited
> publication, and expedited numbers were not ok anymore.
> 
> Would people be OK about asking the Secretariat to request 
> assignment of
> these numbers?
> 
> Allison
> ------- Forwarded Message
> 
> 
> Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 09:59:17 -0700
> From: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
> To: Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com>, Jon Peterson 
> <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
> Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, casner@acm.org, 
> csp@csperkins.org
> Subject: Fast Tracking Request [csp@csperkins.org: Status of 
> RTP spec and profile RFCs]
> 
> Allison and Jon,
> 
> We received the message below regarging
> <draft-ietf-avt-rtp-new-12.txt> and
> <draft-ietf-avt-profile-new-13.txt>.  The message requests advanced
> RFC numbers for these documents.  If you agree with the request,
> please have the IESG Secretariat send us notification to assign these
> numbers.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> RFC Editor
> 
> - ----- Forwarded message from Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> -----
> 
> To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@psg.com
> Subject: Status of RTP spec and profile RFCs
> cc: casner@acm.org
> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:33:23 -0400
> From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=5.0
> 	tests=MSG_ID_ADDED_BY_MTA_3,SPAM_PHRASE_01_02
> 	version=2.43
> X-Spam-Level: *
> 
> RFC Editor, Allison, 
> 
> We've just received the following message from the ITU, who wish to
> reference the new versions of the RTP specification and A/V Profile 
> from H.323 version 5. In order to do this, they need RFC numbers for
> draft-ietf-avt-rtp-new-12.txt and draft-ietf-avt-profile-new-13.txt, 
> both of which are in the queue for publication as Draft Standards.
> 
> If it is possible to get the RFC numbers assigned for these drafts by 
> the time of the ITU SG 16 meeting, from 20-30 May, it would be greatly
> appreciated.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Colin Perkins (AVT co-chair)
> 
> 
> 
> - ------- Forwarded Message
> 
> - --> "Paul E. Jones" writes:
> >From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
> >To: <csp@ISI.EDU>, <casner@acm.org>
> >Cc: "Vivek Bhargava" <vbharga@cisco.com>
> >Subject: H.323v5 / RTP+RTCP / SRTP
> >Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:46:33 -0400
> >
> >Gentlemen,
> >
> >We're preparing text for H.323 version 5 for approval in May 
> 2003.  It 
> >had been our hope for a while that, by the time we approved 
> this spec, 
> >that the new RTP/RTCP and related profile documents would be 
> completed 
> >and an RFC number assigned.
> >
> >Can you comment on whether the drafts that will replace RFC 
> 1889 and RFC 
> >1890 will be approved by the end of May?
> >
> >Also, do you expect the SRTP work to be completed?
> >
> >(By completed, I mean approved and assigned an RFC number 
> that can be 
> >referenced.)
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Paul E. Jones
> >Rapporteur, ITU-T Q2/16
> >
> - ------- End of Forwarded Message
> 
> - ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> ------- End of Forwarded Message
>