Subject: [stir] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-oob-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 06:40:18 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-stir-oob-06: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-stir-oob/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't really understand why this document is requested to be published as
informational and the shepherd write-up unfortunately doesn't provide any
additional information about this decision, so I have to ask: I understand that
the http-based protocol is meant only as an example protocol but how can such a
scheme ever get deployed if there is not even a uniform protocol specified that
a callee or caller can use to retrieve the needed information? If the group
isn't sure about the the protocol selection yet, publishing this as
experimental in order to get some experience with its deployment seems to be
appropriate. However with the informational document right now (any only the
example protocol), there is no guarantee for interoperability and I don't see
how any test deployment could even happen. So what's the intention here?