Media Server Markup Language (MSML)
draft-saleem-msml-09

[Ballot comment]
I agree with the DNP recommendaton in the proposed note to the RFC Editor.

Peter Koch who reviewed on behalf of the DNS Directorate signalled the fact that the document involves in a way which is unclear the 'domain registrar' (in section 5.1). If the document ends by being published this issue should be discussed and clarified.

IANA questions/comments:

- Do you want to have a registry of Control Package names?

- Do you want to have a registry of Response Codes?


Action 1 (Section 20.1):

Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following
assignment in the "Application Media Types" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/

vnd.radisys.msml+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.moml+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-conf+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog-base+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog-group+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog-speech+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog-transform+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog-fax-detect+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-dialog-fax-sendrecv+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-audit+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-audit-conf+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-audit-conn+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-audit-dialog+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]
vnd.radisys.msml-audit-stream+xml [RFC-saleem-msml-08]


Action 2 (Section 20.2):

Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following
assignment in the "Text Media Types" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/text/

vnd.radisys.msml-basic-layout [RFC-saleem-msml-0]


Action 3 (Section 20.3):

Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following
assignment in the "ns" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/ns.html

ID URI Registration template Reference
---- ---- -------------------- ---------
msml urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:msml [msml] [RFC-saleem-msml-08]


Action 4 (Section 20.4):

Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following
assignment in the "schema" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/schema.html

ID URI Filename Reference
---- ----- -------- ---------
msml urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:msml [msml] [RFC-saleem-msml-08]

[Ballot discuss]
Previous IESG note said that publication of this document needs to be delayed until the following documents are published:
    * draft-ietf-mediactrl-sipcontrol-framework
    * draft-ietf-mediactrl-ivr-control-package
    * draft-ietf-mediactrl-mixer-control-package

According to IDtracker, the first 2 documents are in "Publication Requested" state, while the last one is still being worked on by the WG.

So why is this document back to IESG?

ESG,

This document was submitted to the RFC Editor to be published as
an Informational Independent Submission: draft-saleem-msml-07.txt.

Please note that the IESG has previously requested a 6-month delay in
publication (see email below):

3. The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to the IETF work
done in the MEDIACTRL WG and recommends not publishing the
document at this time.

The MEDIACTRL chairs feel that this work directly competes with
ongoing work in their group.


We are resubmitting this document for an RFC 3932 IESG review.

Four week timeout expires on 26 September 2008.


Sincerely,

Sandy Ginoza - USC/ISI
Request for Comments Documents

[Note]: 'IESG Note:    3. The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to the IETF work done in the MEDIACTRL WG and recommends not publishing the document at this time.' added by Cindy Morgan

[Note]: 'IESG Note:    3. The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to the IETF work done in the MEDIACTRL WG and recommends not publishing the document at this time.' added by Amy Vezza

[Ballot discuss]
This is a sort of Discuss Discuss: I agree with the DNP recommendation in the IESG Editor's note. Shouldn't this be in the RFC editor's note, and shouldn't the RFC editor's note say "don't publish (for the reason currently in the IESG note), but if you have to publish this, then at least add the following disclaimer:"?

[Ballot comment]
I agree with the DNP recommendaton in the proposed IESG note.

Peter Koch who reviewed on behalf of the DNS Directorate signalled the fact that the document involves in a way which is unclear the 'domain registrar' (in section 5.1). If the document ends by being published this issue should be discussed and clarified.

[Note]: 'IESG Note:    3. The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to the IETF work done in the MEDIACTRL WG and recommends not publishing the document at this time.' added by Jon Peterson

IANA has questions:

* The IANA Considerations section seems to imply that "registrations
are planned" but doesn't say specifically what they want the IANA to
do. It needs to expand upon what registrations need to be made and
where to make them. The current section is nowhere near explicit
enough and indeed is very confusing about what needs to get done.

* Sections 21 (URN Sub-Namespace Registration) and 22 (XML Schema
Registration) should become sub-sections of the IANA Considerations
section

* Should there be a registry of response codes (from Section 12)?

[Note]: 'IESG Note:    3. The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to the IETF work done in the SPEECHSC WG and recommends not publishing the document at this time.' added by Jon Peterson