Request the publication of the document as an Informational RFC

PROTO questionnaire for: draft-ietf-sipping-dialogusage-05.txt

prepared by: Gonzalo Camarillo [Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com]
Date: 24 November 2006

   Here you have the PROTO write-up for this document:


    1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
         Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready
         to forward to the IESG for publication?

The SIPPING WG chairs have reviewed the document and believe it is
ready for publication. Gonzalo Camarillo is its PROTO shepherd.

    1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members
         and key non-WG members?  Do you have any concerns about the
         depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed?

The draft has been thoroughly reviewed by a number of SIPPING members.

    1.c) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a
         particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational
         complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)?

We do not have any particular concern in that respect.

    1.d) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
         you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of?  For
         example, perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the
         document, or have concerns whether there really is a need for
         it.  In any event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG
         and the WG has indicated it that it still wishes to advance the
         document, detail those concerns in the write-up.

We feel comfortable with the document.

    1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it
         represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with
         others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and
         agree with it?

There is strong consensus within the WG that dialog usage is an 
important issue in the SIP area.

    1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme
         discontent?  If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in
         separate email to the Responsible Area Director.

Nobody has done anything to stop this document.

    1.g) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the
         ID nits? (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html).

Yes, it does.

    1.h) Is the document split into normative and informative references?
         Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not
         also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state?
         (note here that the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with
         normative references to IDs, it will delay publication until all
         such IDs are also ready for publication as RFCs.)

The document only has informative references.

    1.i) For Standards Track and BCP documents, the IESG approval
         announcement includes a write-up section with the following
         sections:

         *    Technical Summary

    Several methods in the Session Initiation Protocol can create an
    association between endpoints known as a dialog.  Some of these
    methods can also create a different, but related, association within
    an existing dialog.  These multiple associations, or dialog usages,
    require carefully coordinated processing as they have independent
    life-cycles, but share common dialog state.  Processing multiple
    dialog usages correctly is not completely understood.  What is
    understood is difficult to implement.
    This memo argues that multiple dialog usages should be avoided.  It
    discusses alternatives to their use and clarifies essential behavior
    for elements that cannot currently avoid them.
    This is an informative document and makes no normative statements of
    any kind.


         *    Working Group Summary

There was strong consensus within the WG that this was an important 
issue that needed to be documented in an RFC.


         *    Protocol Quality

Jon Peterson is the Responsible Area Director. The WG chair shepherd
for the document is Gonzalo Camarillo.