Subject: [FAX] CHAIR Query: Reporting-extensions

From: James Rafferty <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 09:49:24 -0400

Folks,   

In the review of the -eifax draft which is out for WG Last Call, 
an issue has come up about the reference to the reporting-extensions
draft.   

In particular, this draft currently includes proposed extensions to 
MDN and DSN messages related to offramps.  We could either 
keep this material in the draft, since its been under review for a couple 
of months now, or hold it off until we do an Onramps/Offramps draft.   

We need to decide fairly quickly whether this material is sufficiently
stable to be retained.   In order to move -eifax forward, we will  need 
to do a WG Last Call on the reporting-extensions doc shortly if we still 
plan to reference it.   

So, please send in comments on whether you think the 
offramp related extensions to DSN/MDN are sufficiently
stable to be included in a WG Last Call for this document.  

James Rafferty
Chair, Internet Fax WG

*------------------------------------------------*
James Rafferty			
President, Human Communications 	
12 Kevin Drive			
Danbury, CT  06811-2901		
USA					
Voice/Fax:  +1-203-746-4367
Email:  [email-masked]
	 [email-masked]

HC Web Site:  http://www.humancomm.com  
*---------------------------------------------------

---

From: Graham Klyne <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 21:10:04 +0100

>of months now, or hold it off until we do an Onramps/Offramps draft.   

In my opinion, there are some reporting extensions that are useful
independently of the offramp specifics (capability identification,
multipart disposition indication, etc).  I think it would be helpful to
incorporate these.

Reporting extensions that are specific to offramps should, I believe, be
moved forward with the offramp specification.

#g

------------
Graham Klyne
([email-masked])

---

From: Dan Wing <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:09:06 -0700

>multipart disposition indication, etc).  I think it would be helpful to

draft-ietf-fax-reporting-extensions-02.txt doesn't mention multipart 
disposition.  That is in a different draft, 
draft-ietf-fax-mdn-multipart-02.txt and isn't strictly related to
fax.  I want to have review of draft-ietf-fax-mdn-multipart-02.txt by 
the receipt working group (who worked on MDN).

The idea for draft-ietf-fax-reporting-extensions-03.txt is to have
it _only_ contain recipient capability information and nothing
else:  no call-duration, no call start-time, nothing else that is
only interesting for fax offramps.

>moved forward with the offramp specification.

-Dan Wing