IANA Registration of Enumservices for Internet Calendaring
RFC 5333

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.

(Lisa Dusseault) (was Discuss) Yes

(Jon Peterson) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

Comment (2008-01-10 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
Review by Christian Vogt:

Draft-ietf-enum-calendar-service-03 registers ENUM mappings for use by
calendaring applications.  The document is clear and concise, and
includes a thorough security analysis.  It should hence be considered
for publication.

One small addition that I propose for the document's introduction is
examples of the prospective use cases for the mapping specified by this
document.  Where would it be desired to address a calendaring
application with a telephone number?  One use case may be to enable
users to control calendaring applications via SMS.

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Chris Newman) No Objection

(Tim Polk) No Objection

Comment (2008-01-08 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
[This is more of a question than a comment, but it just doesn't rise to
the level of a discuss discuss.  Regardless of the answer, I see no value
in blocking or slowing this document.]

As specified, the ical service registration is overloaded, supporting both
iCalendar/iMIP and CalDAV.  Resources are differentiated according
to the URI scheme.  This makes sense as long as there is no prospect
of supporting the mailto: scheme for CalDAV or http(s): scheme for
iCalendar.  If such work is being contemplated, overloading the
registration seems like a bad idea.

RFC 3283 specifically mentions http for iCalendar as "non-standard
methods", the webdav wg has concluded, and I couldn't find a ID with
email and CalDAV so perhaps this a reasonable strategy.  Still, two
separate registrations seemed like a more reasonable strategy to me.

Is there something I am missing - some convergence of iCal and
CalDAV in common implementations, for example - that makes this
overloaded registration a good idea?

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Mark Townsley) No Objection

(David Ward) No Objection

Magnus Westerlund No Objection