Re: [VPIM] Re: IETF-FAX WG Draft agenda at Yokohama

[Graham Klyne <GK-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave,

If you were to do this, I think you'd also need to state, reasonably 
tightly, the conditions under which the esmtp negotiation would be used 
rather than the UA-based negotiation.  I fear possible confusion or 
fragmentated deployments could be caused if two negotiation mechanisms are 
referenced in FFPIM.

#g
--

At 09:53 PM 7/7/02 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> At 01:32 PM 7/8/2002 +0900, Hiroshi Tamura wrote:
> > 6 SMTP Service Extension for Content Negotiation  (30 min)
> > - draft-ietf-fax-esmtp-conneg-02.txt
> > - 
> > http://www.brandenburg.com/specifications/draft-ietf-fax-esmtp-conneg-03.txt
> >
> > 7 FFPIM  (5 min)
> > - draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-01.txt
>
> The latest version of esmtp-conneg has removed all normative references to 
> fax.  This change is intended to make the specification be appropriate for 
> general email use.
>
> Toyoda-san and I suggest that the requirement for conforming to 
> fax-oriented use of esmtp-conneg, such as with citations to:
>
>      [RFC2305] Toyoda, K., Ohno, H., Murai, J. and  D. Wing,
>                "A Simple Mode of Facsimile Using Internet Mail",
>                RFC 2305, March 1998.
> and
>      [RFC2534] Masinter, L., Holtman, K., Mutz, A. and D. Wing, "
>                Media Features for Display, Print, and Fax",
>                RFC 2534, March 1999.
>
> be added to FFPIM.
>
> How do folks feel about this?
>
> d/
>
> ----------
> Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.850.1850
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent to you, since you are subscribed to
> vpim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx You can manage your subscription at
> http://www.neystadt.org/cgi-bin/majordomo

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>