Subject: Protocol Action: Voice Profile for Internet Mail - version 2 to Draft Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 17:02:09 -0400

The IESG has approved publication of the following Internet-Drafts as
Draft Standards:

 o Voice Profile for Internet Mail - version 2
	<draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-05.txt>

 o Toll Quality Voice - 32 kbit/s ADPCM MIME Sub-type Registration
	<draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-32k-03.txt>

 o Content Duration MIME Header Definition
	<draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-dur-03.txt>

These documents are the product of the Voice Profile for Internet Mail
Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Ned Freed and Patrik
Faltstrom.

Technical Summary
 
 The VPIM specification outlines a way of carrying voice mail
 traffic using SMTP and MIME.  Version 2 of VPIM is primarily
 intended as a medium of interchange between dissimilar voice
 mail systems, but ordinary MIME user agents can also receive
 such messages if they support the audio/32kadpcm content-type.
 Such user agents could also send vpim-compatible voice messages
 with slight modifications to generate the multipart/voice-message
 content-type.

 The audio/32kadpcm specification updates the definition of the
 MIME content-type for A-law or mu-law 32kbps audio data
 encoded according to ITU-T recommendation G.726.

 The content durection header document describes the MIME header
 Content-Duration that is intended for use with any time varying
 media content (typically audio/* or video/*).

Working Group Summary

 The original VPIM V2 specification was a product of the VPIM
 working group of the Electronic Messaging Association.
 Responsibility for this work was shifted to the VPIM working
 group in the IETF, which produced this revision.

Protocol Quality

 Ned Freed reviewed these specifications for the IESG.

RFC Editor Note:

The IESG requests that the text below be included as an IESG note when
the document is published:

The IESG is concerned that draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-04.txt
does not contain an explicit applicability statement. It is
the IESG's understanding that this messaging service profile
is intended to be used between voice messaging systems while
the upcoming IVM work is the profile intended to be used
to communicate with desktop system. If so, this document
needs to avoid confusion by stating what its domain of
applicability is.

Neither draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-dur-01.txt nor
draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-32k-02.txt indicate what, if
anything, has changed since the previous version. Simply
adding a statement to the effect that "the only changes
between this document and RFC xxxx are editorial in nature"
would address this.