Since this document is going to be standards-track, I think the contact for the
dtls-id registration should be the IESG instead of the author.
Russ
On Mar 17, 2017, at 9:18 AM, The IESG <iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Multiparty Multimedia Session
Control WG (mmusic) to consider the following document:
- 'Using the SDP Offer/Answer Mechanism for DTLS'
<draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-22.txt> as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2017-04-06. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document defines the SDP offer/answer procedures for negotiating
and establishing a DTLS association. The document also defines the
criteria for when a new DTLS association must be established. The
document updates RFC 5763 and RFC 7345, by replacing common SDP
offer/answer procedures with a reference to this specification.
This document defines a new SDP media-level attribute, 'dtls-id'.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.