Re: Internal WG Review: Recharter of IP Telephony (iptel)

[Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>]

On fredag, maj 16, 2003, at 17:34 Europe/Stockholm, Jonathan Rosenberg 
wrote:

> I think the following text, added to the charter, would address both 
> issues:
>
> TRIP and the gateway registration protocol are orthogonal to the 
> DNS-based mechanisms specified in ENUM and RFC 3264. Those mechanisms 
> are used to translate a URI, representing a name, to an address. If 
> that address is a phone number in the telephone network, trip and 
> tgrep can be used to assist in determining the right route (through 
> various gateways) to that number.
>
>
> Is that satisfactory? If so, I will add the text in the appropriate 
> place.
Let me put it this way.

_Somewhere_ in the IETF, we need to discuss how these routing protocols 
fit together. If IPTEL is the right group, I don't know. That is up to 
you all which work in this area.

My point was that the charter possibly should say whether these kind of 
discussions are in scope or out of scope. If it is in scope, other wg's 
(ENUM, SIP, SIPPING etc) should be told and redirected to this wg if 
similar discussions arise.

ADs are the ones which I think should help the wg chairs find the wg 
which is best suited to discuss these common issues. Not I.

   paf