Registration of media type text/3gpp-tt

[Colin Perkins]

Jose,

On 8 Oct 2004, at 10:44, Rey Jose wrote:
...
>> The ietf-types list is for informal media type reviews only.
>> It is not where types are "considered" or "approved".
>> Somtimes people comment on registrations, other times they don't.
>>
>
> Yes, you are right, "review" is the correct term.
>
> However, reading the attached email from Colin, I understand that this 
> review is 'required' for WGLC.  This means that whether this review is 
> "no comments" or there are in fact comments, I (we) have to know in 
> order to progress the document.   Specially this part (original 
> attached):
>
> "In future, as new RTP payload formats are developed, we will require 
> expert review of the media type registration as part of the working 
> group last call process. Please contact the chairs for guidance on the 
> procedure for this review, when you believe your draft is ready for 
> working group last call. We will not forward drafts to the IESG for 
> publication **unless they have received such review.**"

This is an AVT policy, to avoid last minute confusion and problems such 
as we had with the RTP payload format for text conversation; it's not a 
wider IETF requirement. If no comments result after a reasonable time 
period, so be it.

Colin