Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F99628C4F7; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:38:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.385 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.385 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.948, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U6tanoBMBQcY; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:38:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA40728C4A5; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:38:41 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FDA128C4A1 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:38:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4QYm++WG7kMk for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:38:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from peregrine.verisign.com (peregrine.verisign.com [216.168.239.74]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C7528C4A5 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:38:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from dul1wnexcn03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (dul1wnexcn03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.170.12.113]) by peregrine.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m1QHST2K008270; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:28:29 -0500 Received: from DUL1WNEXMB05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.170.12.240]) by dul1wnexcn03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:38:32 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:38:32 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <74F79FEF-49AE-4B07-A86B-B0576667B962@hxr.us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 Thread-Index: Ach4ijS4IyqUKUM2RWWsK05IV6SMBQAEUBDQ From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" To: "Andrew Newton" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2008 17:38:32.0934 (UTC) FILETIME=[68416060:01C8789E] Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Andy, one of the docs up for consideration at the BOF in Vancouver in fact spoke to the use of zone files (and I'm not saying that that was necessarily the right approach). This is indicative of the point that I'm making that the specifics of the problem(s) to be addressed by the WG have not yet been defined by the group in a requirements doc. So, should a partial list of possible RFCs and technologies that should underlie the solution(s) be pre-determined in the charter? I do not think so. That's all. Ken -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Newton [mailto:andy@hxr.us] Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:14 AM To: Cartwright, Kenneth Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 On Feb 25, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote: > Should SSL, HTTP, TCP, Zone Files, HTTP Digest, WSDL, SOAP, etc, etc > all be added into the list? Zone files and WSDL? If the scope of the problem is so unknown that the net has to be cast that wide, I do not think the IETF should charter such a working group. -andy _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE1A28C3B0; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.078 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.641, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iGb-FVDLYBwQ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688F228C264; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:17 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A813A6C74 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PnUAIBy-Loef for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC1943A6C82 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1QG8hin025707 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:08:45 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:06:58 -0500 Message-ID: <00e301c87891$9e5d6110$db182330$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ach4kZ0ntFTAj2C6TdqIzCHaKz5Kzw== Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] presumed final peppermint agenda. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org I think this about does it unless someone has something to add.. IETF 71 PEPPERMINT BOF Agenda Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection 1510-1610 Afternoon Session II Franklin 11/12 INT dna Detecting Network Attachment WG Franklin 5 OPS grow Global Routing Operations WG Franklin 3/4 RAI peppermint Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection BOF Franklin 13 RTG isis IS-IS for IP Internets WG Salon I SEC ltans Long-Term Archive and Notary Services WG Franklin 5 SEC msec Multicast Security WG Chair(s): Richard Shockey Tom Creighton RAI Director(s): Jon Peterson jon.peterson@neustar.biz Cullen Jennings fluffy@cisco.com Agenda Bashing. Presentation of the proposed charter. 10 min ( see below ) 1. Title : Consolidated Provisioning Problem Statement Author(s) : D. Schwartz, R. Mahy, A. Duric, E. Lewis Filename : draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2008-2-11 This document describes the type of data provisioned among Voice Service Providers and underscores the need for clearly defined structures and interfaces to facilitate this provisioning. This work is in support of the service provider peering as defined by the SPEERMINT WG. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-p rovisioning-problem-statement-00.txt 2. Title : A Provisioning Protocol for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : K. Cartwright, et al. Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt Pages : 117 Date : 2008-02-25 This document defines a provisioning protocol for ENUM-SIP addressing servers. This protocol has been recently published as part of CableLabs(r) PacketCable(tm) specifications. It allows SIP service providers to provision and manage session establishment data used by SIP network elements to route SIP sessions to the target destinations which may be served by the SIP service provider's own internal network or by a session peering partner. The data provisioned into an ENUM-SIP addressing server is queried by SIP entities using ENUM or SIP. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.t xt 3. A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Provisioning Protocol Requirements for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : T. Creighton, J. Mule Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2008-02-18 This document presents use cases and protocol requirements for provisioning ENUM-SIP addressing servers. The provisioned data is used by an addressing server to return part of the session establishment data to SIP entities so that they can route SIP sessions to the target destinations. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements- 00.txt General Discussion The Usual Questions. A. Is this a problem that the IETF needs to work on? B. Who wants to work on this problem? ************ Peppermint Proposed Charter Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia Interconnection. Mailing Lists: peppermint@ietf.org General information about the mailing list is at: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Temporary Area Directorate: Real Time Applications (RAI) Ultimate Area Directorate: TBD Chairs: TBD PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF has done significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among real-time application service providers and how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data should be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. These administrative domains are of any practical size and could be service providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or bilateral or multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could include bulk data as well as real time updates. Typical data include mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various types of network databases. The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF1F28C49D; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:14:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.189, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WzCIj6NTEu8E; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:14:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 595F33A6C0A; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:14:01 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C92083A6C46 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:14:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gXQ4FD1IUBuJ for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:14:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from zeke.ecotroph.net (zeke.toscano.org [69.31.8.124]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C3733A6C0A for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:14:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from zx80.arin.net ([::ffff:192.136.136.45]) (AUTH: PLAIN anewton, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by zeke.ecotroph.net with esmtp; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:13:53 -0500 id 0158C3CA.47C42CB1.00006924 Message-Id: <74F79FEF-49AE-4B07-A86B-B0576667B962@hxr.us> From: Andrew Newton To: "Cartwright, Kenneth" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:13:52 -0500 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org On Feb 25, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote: > Should SSL, HTTP, TCP, Zone Files, HTTP > Digest, WSDL, SOAP, etc, etc all be added into the list? Zone files and WSDL? If the scope of the problem is so unknown that the net has to be cast that wide, I do not think the IETF should charter such a working group. -andy _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC26B3A6C66; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:32:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.41 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.41 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ikeYFU21fLw5; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:32:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A81C3A67FF; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:32:58 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12853A67FF; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:32:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b6Y37UtPXp9b; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:32:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (host6.216.41.24.conversent.net [216.41.24.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6A753A6783; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:32:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.7) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.240.5; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:32:34 -0500 Received: from mail.acmepacket.com ([216.41.24.7]) by mail.acmepacket.com ([216.41.24.7]) with mapi; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:32:34 -0500 From: Hadriel Kaplan To: Richard Shockey , "otmar.lendl@enum.at" Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:30:53 -0500 Thread-Topic: [Speermint] I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt Thread-Index: Ach3/lP1YlJ4BqNfR/iwl+z1P+KHZgAA7TEwAAUJ2/AAA2ePMA== Message-ID: References: <20080225211502.9836C3A6D85@core3.amsl.com> <03e901c87816$8cf8ac20$a6ea0460$@us> In-Reply-To: <03e901c87816$8cf8ac20$a6ea0460$@us> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "speermint@ietf.org" , "PEPPERMINT@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] [Speermint] I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Well... working for one of only two vendors who implemented it, afaict, it failed for multiple reasons. None of them had to do with prefix aggregation or scalability, at least at the time. BGP was definitely a poor choice, though more for marketing/perception reasons than technical, albeit there were some major technical issues with it too. It was never tied to BGP for IP routing - it operated on a separate plane really, and even had a different protocol model for internal route distribution, but yes it inherited too much of BGP in terms of deployment model and some unnecessary baggage. The big killer though, imho, was there was no real problem at the time that it solved. It's moot though - I'm definitely not suggesting a TRIP down memory lane. :) -hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us] > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 8:26 PM > To: Hadriel Kaplan; otmar.lendl@enum.at > Cc: speermint@ietf.org; PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Speermint] I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background- > 01.txt > > > Awesome draft. (I missed it the first time 'round) > > > > I agree with your statement of "The obvious solution is to add an on- > > demand mapping step ahead of the routing protocol." The trick will be > > how that works/scales, and how it interacts with a routing protocol. > > The easy case is the non-transit bilateral peering - the very hard > > case is transit. > > > > One very minor nit: I don't think TRIP failed due to being prefix- > > based and thus needing aggregation. I think it failed because the > > market wasn't ready for it (the problem didn't need to be fixed for > > most people yet), the idea of implementing/using BGP scared off voip > > vendors, and it didn't cover some of the routing selection models > > people need. > > IMHO TRIP failed because it was using a 120 mm howitzer to deal with a > problem better dealt with a BB gun. There were enough issues with BGP as > it > was. _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2101F28C4FD; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:48:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.878 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.878 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.441, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DQMhLbDsX-Wt; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:48:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35A2128C55E; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:43:30 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21A9928C55A for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:43:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X8PUjy-IwAyZ for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:43:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2740C28C70D for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:36:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-38.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1Q1Z7fE002305 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:35:14 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:33:23 -0500 Message-ID: <03f001c87817$97c01cf0$c74056d0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ach32+fEaWUvns8OT++GkiXcdKkmhwAO6iGw Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: I-D Action:draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----Original Message----- From: i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:15 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : A Provisioning Protocol for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : K. Cartwright, et al. Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt Pages : 117 Date : 2008-02-25 This document defines a provisioning protocol for ENUM-SIP addressing servers. This protocol has been recently published as part of CableLabs(r) PacketCable(tm) specifications. It allows SIP service providers to provision and manage session establishment data used by SIP network elements to route SIP sessions to the target destinations which may be served by the SIP service provider's own internal network or by a session peering partner. The data provisioned into an ENUM-SIP addressing server is queried by SIP entities using ENUM or SIP. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.t xt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. ------=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="ATT00932.dat" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00932.dat" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-25100245.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt ------=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-01.txt" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-25100245.I-D\@ietf.org> ------=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0 Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT00935.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00935.txt" _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce ------=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint ------=_NextPart_000_03F1_01C877ED.AEEA14F0-- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF32428C7D0; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:46:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.88 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.443, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FK3kSxNQx12p; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:46:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B443A6E73; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:37:55 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F123A6C14; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:37:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rk6N5WxQaCB6; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:37:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A773A6EF0; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:28:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-38.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1Q1RXhk027744 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:27:44 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Hadriel Kaplan'" , References: <20080225211502.9836C3A6D85@core3.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:25:48 -0500 Message-ID: <03e901c87816$8cf8ac20$a6ea0460$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ach3/lP1YlJ4BqNfR/iwl+z1P+KHZgAA7TEwAAUJ2/A= Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Cc: speermint@ietf.org, PEPPERMINT@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] [Speermint] I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org > Awesome draft. (I missed it the first time 'round) > > I agree with your statement of "The obvious solution is to add an on- > demand mapping step ahead of the routing protocol." The trick will be > how that works/scales, and how it interacts with a routing protocol. > The easy case is the non-transit bilateral peering - the very hard > case is transit. > > One very minor nit: I don't think TRIP failed due to being prefix- > based and thus needing aggregation. I think it failed because the > market wasn't ready for it (the problem didn't need to be fixed for > most people yet), the idea of implementing/using BGP scared off voip > vendors, and it didn't cover some of the routing selection models > people need. IMHO TRIP failed because it was using a 120 mm howitzer to deal with a problem better dealt with a BB gun. There were enough issues with BGP as it was. _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F27E3A6D83; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:11:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jmR8Mez75DVn; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:11:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0B03A6E35; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:33:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 864E53A6E34; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:33:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KI3No9u4ujmU; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:33:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (host6.216.41.24.conversent.net [216.41.24.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC2928C563; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:24:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.7) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.240.5; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:24:23 -0500 Received: from mail.acmepacket.com ([216.41.24.7]) by mail.acmepacket.com ([216.41.24.7]) with mapi; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:24:23 -0500 From: Hadriel Kaplan To: "otmar.lendl@enum.at" Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:24:02 -0500 Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt Thread-Index: Ach3/lP1YlJ4BqNfR/iwl+z1P+KHZgAA7TEw Message-ID: References: <20080225211502.9836C3A6D85@core3.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20080225211502.9836C3A6D85@core3.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "speermint@ietf.org" , "PEPPERMINT@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Awesome draft. (I missed it the first time 'round) I agree with your statement of "The obvious solution is to add an on-demand mapping step ahead of the routing protocol." The trick will be how that works/scales, and how it interacts with a routing protocol. The easy case is the non-transit bilateral peering - the very hard case is transit. One very minor nit: I don't think TRIP failed due to being prefix-based and thus needing aggregation. I think it failed because the market wasn't ready for it (the problem didn't need to be fixed for most people yet), the idea of implementing/using BGP scared off voip vendors, and it didn't cover some of the routing selection models people need. -hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 4:15 PM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Subject: I-D Action:draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : VoIP Peering: Background and Assumptions > Author(s) : O. Lendl > Filename : draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt > Pages : 15 > Date : 2008-02-25 > > This documents provides background for the work on VoIP peering and > tries to provide guidance on what kind of work is needed to > facilitate widespread SIP-based peering of telephony networks. It is > intended to spur discussion on the work about peering and should also > serve as input to the ongoing discussions on reducing Spam for > Internet Telephony (SPIT). > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lendl-speermint-background- > 01.txt > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of > the message. > You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > to change your subscription settings. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the > username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt". > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. > In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-lendl-speermint-background-01.txt". > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail > readers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794523A6D8A; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:59:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.464 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y0URYiXd-OMP; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:59:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7DE28C578; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:52:06 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8453A6DB5 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:52:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vFjxuJwDoZhE for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:52:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from peregrine.verisign.com (peregrine.verisign.com [216.168.239.74]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46BA328C9B8 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:41:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from dul1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (dul1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.170.12.138]) by peregrine.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m1PLV0Kb005240; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:31:00 -0500 Received: from DUL1WNEXMB05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.170.12.240]) by dul1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:41:02 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:41:01 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <63C6E739-B561-4566-953F-345E2935E89E@hxr.us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 Thread-Index: Ach36UNguICGZwUJSHeWvmx1U8Q8WwACeeZA From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" To: "Andrew Newton" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2008 21:41:02.0401 (UTC) FILETIME=[1E001B10:01C877F7] Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Hi Andy, 1) Ok. We'll agree to disagree. 2) I did not say that it said that we MUST use 4114. You are correct, it certainly does not say that. 3) I guess we'll have to agree to disagree again. Proposing a possible and partial solution before the problem has even been defined is not the best approach, imho. Your proposal to add REST into the list of possible partial solutions further bolsters my point. It is not good to start listing possible partial solutions in the charter before the problem has been clearly defined. Where do you stop adding items to the list and how do you know that REST is good (or the best approach) for the problem(s) to be solved? Should SSL, HTTP, TCP, Zone Files, HTTP Digest, WSDL, SOAP, etc, etc all be added into the list? I think not. It's best to leave that to the WG, imho. But we've beaten this to death now and we may have to agree to disagree. :-) Ken -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Newton [mailto:andy@hxr.us] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 3:02 PM To: Cartwright, Kenneth Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 On Feb 25, 2008, at 1:50 PM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On the first point, I was there and listening intently and > participating as was appropriate, and the impression I came away with > was the one I communicated. But obviously, this was my impression, > certainly not a formal position of the BOF. Let's just agree to disagree on this point, especially since it might be inconsequential. > On the second point, the WG has not even fully agreed on the scope or > nature of the problem, so putting what could be part of the solution > in the charter is premature, imho. Furthermore, the charter should > not suggest the solution, imho. I do not believe the text of the charter is saying that 4114 MUST be used. It is simply pointing at a specification that already addresses this space, and says a potential working group MAY use PARTS of 4114. > The charter should identify the broad scope of the problem and leave > the rest (e.g. the specific definition of the > problem(s) and the corresponding solutions) up to the WG, imho. I disagree. Some working group charters do specifically carve out scope to better focus participants. I think that would be appropriate here. I'd even be in favor further limiting the solution space beyond the XML limitation, such as saying that it will be an XML/REST solution. -andy _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D163A6E73; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:30:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.195 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.195 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.242, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bgQIPO-bAVk6; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:30:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EAC328C9F4; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:10:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32A9128C808 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:10:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2cmHDuKAdHMQ for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:10:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from zeke.ecotroph.net (zeke.blacka.com [69.31.8.124]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B15828CC2C for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:01:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from zx80.arin.net ([::ffff:192.136.136.45]) (AUTH: PLAIN anewton, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by zeke.ecotroph.net with esmtp; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:01:48 -0500 id 0158C74A.47C31EAC.00004380 Message-Id: <63C6E739-B561-4566-953F-345E2935E89E@hxr.us> From: Andrew Newton To: "Cartwright, Kenneth" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:01:48 -0500 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org On Feb 25, 2008, at 1:50 PM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote: > Hi Andy, > > On the first point, I was there and listening intently and > participating > as was appropriate, and the impression I came away with was the one I > communicated. But obviously, this was my impression, certainly not a > formal position of the BOF. Let's just agree to disagree on this point, especially since it might be inconsequential. > On the second point, the WG has not even fully agreed on the scope or > nature of the problem, so putting what could be part of the solution > in > the charter is premature, imho. Furthermore, the charter should not > suggest the solution, imho. I do not believe the text of the charter is saying that 4114 MUST be used. It is simply pointing at a specification that already addresses this space, and says a potential working group MAY use PARTS of 4114. > The charter should identify the broad scope > of the problem and leave the rest (e.g. the specific definition of the > problem(s) and the corresponding solutions) up to the WG, imho. I disagree. Some working group charters do specifically carve out scope to better focus participants. I think that would be appropriate here. I'd even be in favor further limiting the solution space beyond the XML limitation, such as saying that it will be an XML/REST solution. -andy _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54CDA28C9E6; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:57:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.317 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.317 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.880, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id udOo1MhsI2Jn; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:57:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FF828C4D7; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:55:01 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF19528C4D7 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:54:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BqndF5cIeKQz for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:54:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from peregrine.verisign.com (peregrine.verisign.com [216.168.239.74]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D0E428CA53 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:50:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from dul1wnexcn03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (dul1wnexcn03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.170.12.113]) by peregrine.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m1PIePve030486; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:40:25 -0500 Received: from DUL1WNEXMB05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.170.12.240]) by dul1wnexcn03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:50:27 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:50:26 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 Thread-Index: Ach32g2WF1BIs+mRSkKdYWOAHXS2lgABFZZw From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" To: "Andrew Newton" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2008 18:50:27.0027 (UTC) FILETIME=[493DFA30:01C877DF] Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Hi Andy, On the first point, I was there and listening intently and participating as was appropriate, and the impression I came away with was the one I communicated. But obviously, this was my impression, certainly not a formal position of the BOF. On the second point, the WG has not even fully agreed on the scope or nature of the problem, so putting what could be part of the solution in the charter is premature, imho. Furthermore, the charter should not suggest the solution, imho. The charter should identify the broad scope of the problem and leave the rest (e.g. the specific definition of the problem(s) and the corresponding solutions) up to the WG, imho. Ken -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Newton [mailto:andy@hxr.us] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:13 PM To: Cartwright, Kenneth Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 On Feb 21, 2008, at 4:04 PM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote: > Just curious what the thinking is behind this statement in the > charter: > > "The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible." > > This subject was discussed at the last BOF and received little support > (if any at all). So while 4114 certainly need not be ruled out as an > option, singling it out for inclusion the charter of the WG seems (1) > un-necessary, (2) somewhat inappropriate detail for a charter because > it suggests a partial *solution* when the charter is designed to > define just the scope of the *problem(s)* to be analyzed and solved by > the WG, and (3) possibly contradictory to a general opinion expressed > at the last BOF. So it seems that the charter would not be harmed by > removing this statement, but would be improved by removing it. First, I'm not sure about your first point regarding "little support". While I was not in attendance, I did listen in via audio (and even made a few statements via Jabber). I do not remember any solution path having support over others. I was under the impression that the available solution paths were being explored, and the feedback being sought was about the necessary level of desire to solve the problem through any of the solutions available. Again, I was not there, so I could be wrong. Second, I think leaving the wording around 4114 in the text is a good idea. Given that EPP and 4114 solve some aspects of this problem, it is reasonable for the IETF to ask why you/we are asking for a working group to solve the same problem and why 4114 cannot be re-used. -andy _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3121A28C5C2; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:22:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.156 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.156 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.281, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iqhRJFw5Wf+p; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:22:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D9928C6CF; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:17:20 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F1A28C697 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:17:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o9LixPiYKAZe for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:17:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from zeke.ecotroph.net (zeke.blacka.com [69.31.8.124]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BCC028C757 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:13:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from zx80.arin.net ([::ffff:192.136.136.45]) (AUTH: PLAIN anewton, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by zeke.ecotroph.net with esmtp; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:12:55 -0500 id 0158C752.47C30527.00005FED Message-Id: From: Andrew Newton To: "Cartwright, Kenneth" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:12:55 -0500 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org On Feb 21, 2008, at 4:04 PM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote: > Just curious what the thinking is behind this statement in the > charter: > > "The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible." > > This subject was discussed at the last BOF and received little support > (if any at all). So while 4114 certainly need not be ruled out as an > option, singling it out for inclusion the charter of the WG seems (1) > un-necessary, (2) somewhat inappropriate detail for a charter > because it > suggests a partial *solution* when the charter is designed to define > just the scope of the *problem(s)* to be analyzed and solved by the > WG, > and (3) possibly contradictory to a general opinion expressed at the > last BOF. So it seems that the charter would not be harmed by > removing > this statement, but would be improved by removing it. First, I'm not sure about your first point regarding "little support". While I was not in attendance, I did listen in via audio (and even made a few statements via Jabber). I do not remember any solution path having support over others. I was under the impression that the available solution paths were being explored, and the feedback being sought was about the necessary level of desire to solve the problem through any of the solutions available. Again, I was not there, so I could be wrong. Second, I think leaving the wording around 4114 in the text is a good idea. Given that EPP and 4114 solve some aspects of this problem, it is reasonable for the IETF to ask why you/we are asking for a working group to solve the same problem and why 4114 cannot be re-used. -andy _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E51928C20D; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:13:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.88 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.443, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6mRn1A+Tzj15; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:13:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA8D728C175; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:13:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08A5028C15B; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:13:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A3MZw2AYnPlD; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:13:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E053E3A68A0; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:13:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-38.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1OMCK5g026130 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:12:28 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: , Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:10:39 -0500 Message-ID: <335b01c87732$1f19bdf0$5d4d39d0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ach2/+Fg0gcdqw0/QXuL9tWkFwu44AAMhfMA Content-language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: [CYBERTEL] The Future of IP Interconnection: Technical, Economic and Public Policy Aspects X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org FYI from our friends at the Commission.. ******** The following report, produced by WIK-Consult on behalf of the European Commission, has just been published on the European Commission's web site. I had the pleasure and honor of working with some very exceptional colleagues. Those of you who are familiar with my previous work on the subject will see that this is a deeper and more comprehensive treatment. =============== The Future of IP Interconnection: Technical, Economic and Public Policy Aspects - prepared by WIK-Consult. http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/library/ext_studies/ind ex_en.htm#2008 Executive Summary only: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/library/ext_studies /future_ip_intercon/ip_intercon_study_exec_sum.pdf Full Study: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/library/ext_studies /future_ip_intercon/ip_intercon_study_final.pdf Cheers, = Scott _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5282028C811; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:30:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.906 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.469, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CKwq06AU1AhT; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:30:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFBE28C3EF; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:30:11 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1957F28C3EF for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:30:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13H8QW1dU6aa for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:30:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA4328C432 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:30:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-38.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1MIT62V026259 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:29:08 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Hadriel Kaplan'" , References: <00d901c874cb$1726c8e0$45745aa0$@us> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:27:28 -0500 Message-ID: <0d4501c87580$959ac130$c0d04390$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achz5x/jNs+UqwlvTg+8g0X3Ki264QBkc9sQAAD6YZA= Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Hadriel Kaplan [mailto:HKaplan@acmepacket.com] > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:49 PM > To: Richard Shockey; PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. > > > Hi Richard, > I have only been at a few BOFs at the stage where a new WG is about to > be formed in RAI, so could you clarify a couple things for me? > > 1) What are the remaining questions to be asked and answered at this > BOF in order for a WG to be formed/approved? Just the charter? A. First task for a 2nd BOF is a re-demonstration of interest and support within the community for doing the work. The IESG needs to see that it is a "doable problem" and no one is going to go off and try to boil the ocean or something like trying to put certs into a e164 number based DNS tree, for instance. We need to reask the usual questions and a nose count. Good attendance obviously helps but, alas, beer will not be served. B. Consensus on the charter is the next order of business. Though the charter is ultimately negotiated between the AD's, chairs and BOF consensus. We've had some input on that we need to finalize rough consensus on scope and deliverables etc. > 2) I see some items on the agenda which I would consider topics for > the WG, not BOF. Specifically, potential solutions to some of the > problems outlined in the charter. Are they being discussed now to > help provide examples that the charter items are solvable, or to make > sure the charter is written correctly, or are we expected to actually > agree on a solution before the WG is formed? The Mule drafts to which you obviously refer are IMHO a demonstration that the charter items are eminently solvable. The drafts to on the agenda are not "the solution" only an example of solutions already out there. We only need to agree on the scope of the solution before the WG is formed. These drafts, however IMHO are an excellent insight into how the problem might be solved, once its defined. First the WG will define the requirements then move to the solution like every other WG. This proposed WG does have the advantage of having a great deal of thought and work already put into it as evidenced by these ID's. > > 3) With regard to David's consolidated problem statement draft, what > would the ultimate outcome of that draft be? Would it be a one-and- > only-one requirements document for the WG, or would it just be for one > particular problem the WG addresses? I could be either. That is a charter scope issue. Davids draft tends to deal with issues surrounding service providers while the charter leaves open the use of "the solution" for enterprise PBX's etc. There is no reason a group of enterprises could multi-laterally federate on their own through private data exchanges. This as we all know has already been done in certain industry specific market segments. As much as AD's want narrowly defined charters its clear from comments already received that the use for such PBX to PBX data exchanges could occur. (I ask because the scope of the > charter is broader than the problem draft) Excellent points ... > > > -hadriel > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint- > bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of Richard Shockey > > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:48 PM > > To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. > > > > > > Comments Please! > > > > ######### > > > > IETF 71 PEPPERMINT BOF Agenda > > > > 1510-1610 Afternoon Session II > > > > WEDNESDAY, March 12, 2008 > > > > Breakout Room RAI peppermint Provisioning Extensions in > Peering > > Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection BOF > > > > Chair(s): > > > > Richard Shockey > > Tom Creighton > > > > > > RAI Director(s): > > > > Jon Peterson jon.peterson@neustar.biz > > Cullen Jennings fluffy@cisco.com > > > > > > Agenda Bashing. > > > > Presentation of the proposed charter. 10 min ( see below) > > > > 1. > > Title : Consolidated Provisioning Problem > Statement > > Author(s) : D. Schwartz, R. Mahy, A. Duric, E. Lewis > > Filename : > > draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem- > statement- > > 00.txt > > Pages : 12 > > Date : 2008-2-11 > > > > This document describes the type of data provisioned among Voice > > Service Providers and underscores the need for clearly defined > > structures and interfaces to facilitate this provisioning. This > work > > is > > in support of the service provider peering as defined by the > > SPEERMINT WG. > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schwartz-peppermint- > > consolidated-p > > rovisioning-problem-statement-00.txt > > > > > > > > 2. > > Title : A Provisioning Protocol for ENUM-SIP > Addressing > > Servers > > Author(s) : K. Cartwright, et al. > > Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt > > Pages : 117 > > Date : 2008-02-18 > > > > This document defines a provisioning protocol for ENUM-SIP > addressing > > servers. This protocol has been recently published as part of > > CableLabs(r) PacketCable(tm) specifications. It allows SIP service > > providers to provision and manage session establishment data used by > SIP > > network elements to route SIP sessions to the target destinations > which > > may > > be served by the operator's own internal network or by a session > peering > > partner. The data provisioned into an ENUM-SIP addressing server is > > queried > > by SIP entities using ENUM or SIP. > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp- > protocol- > > 00.t > > xt > > > > > > > > 3. A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet- > Drafts > > directories. > > > > Title : Provisioning Protocol Requirements for > ENUM-SIP > > Addressing Servers > > Author(s) : T. Creighton, J. Mule > > Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements- > 00.txt > > Pages : 16 > > Date : 2008-02-18 > > > > This document presents use cases and protocol requirements for > > provisioning > > ENUM-SIP addressing servers. The provisioned data is used by an > > addressing > > server to return part of the session establishment data to SIP > entities so > > that they can route SIP sessions to the target destinations. > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp- > > requirements- > > 00.txt > > > > > > > > General Discussion > > > > The Usual Questions. > > > > A. Is this a problem that the IETF needs to work on? > > > > B. Who wants to work on this problem? > > > > > > ************ > > > > Peppermint Proposed Charter > > > > Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia > > Interconnection. > > > > Mailing Lists: > > > > peppermint@ietf.org > > > > General information about the mailing list is at: > > > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > > > > > Temporary Area Directorate: Real Time Applications (RAI) > > > > Ultimate Area Directorate: TBD > > > > Chairs: TBD > > > > > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based > Multimedia > > Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF > has > > done > > significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. > > > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the > > translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among > > real-time application service providers and how such services > interconnect > > across administrative boundaries. > > > > The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to > be > > exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data > > should > > be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be > outside > > the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. > These > > administrative domains are of any practical size and could be > service > > providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. > > > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia > Interconnection are > > typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or > bilateral > > or > > multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could include > bulk data > > as well as real time updates. Typical data include mappings of phone > > numbers > > to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network > > interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there > is a > > specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various > types of > > network databases. > > > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > consultation > > from > > the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group > may also > > reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. > > > > The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and > be > > based > > on XML documents and XML document exchanges. > > > > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 > > > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 > > > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 > > > > > > Richard Shockey > > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > > NeuStar > > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 > > PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 > > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PEPPERMINT mailing list > > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D46E328C166; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:49:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.379 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.379 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FVKlbLWLmkfd; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:48:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C6CD3A6B68; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:48:57 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DF763A6BBD for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:48:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i2msRqzVgwcp for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:48:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (host6.216.41.24.conversent.net [216.41.24.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD0A3A6B68 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:48:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.7) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.240.5; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:48:36 -0500 Received: from mail.acmepacket.com ([216.41.24.7]) by mail.acmepacket.com ([216.41.24.7]) with mapi; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:48:36 -0500 From: Hadriel Kaplan To: Richard Shockey , "PEPPERMINT@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:48:34 -0500 Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. Thread-Index: Achz5x/jNs+UqwlvTg+8g0X3Ki264QBkc9sQ Message-ID: References: <00d901c874cb$1726c8e0$45745aa0$@us> In-Reply-To: <00d901c874cb$1726c8e0$45745aa0$@us> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Hi Richard, I have only been at a few BOFs at the stage where a new WG is about to be formed in RAI, so could you clarify a couple things for me? 1) What are the remaining questions to be asked and answered at this BOF in order for a WG to be formed/approved? Just the charter? 2) I see some items on the agenda which I would consider topics for the WG, not BOF. Specifically, potential solutions to some of the problems outlined in the charter. Are they being discussed now to help provide examples that the charter items are solvable, or to make sure the charter is written correctly, or are we expected to actually agree on a solution before the WG is formed? 3) With regard to David's consolidated problem statement draft, what would the ultimate outcome of that draft be? Would it be a one-and-only-one requirements document for the WG, or would it just be for one particular problem the WG addresses? (I ask because the scope of the charter is broader than the problem draft) -hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Richard Shockey > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:48 PM > To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. > > > Comments Please! > > ######### > > IETF 71 PEPPERMINT BOF Agenda > > 1510-1610 Afternoon Session II > > WEDNESDAY, March 12, 2008 > > Breakout Room RAI peppermint Provisioning Extensions in Peering > Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection BOF > > Chair(s): > > Richard Shockey > Tom Creighton > > > RAI Director(s): > > Jon Peterson jon.peterson@neustar.biz > Cullen Jennings fluffy@cisco.com > > > Agenda Bashing. > > Presentation of the proposed charter. 10 min ( see below) > > 1. > Title : Consolidated Provisioning Problem Statement > Author(s) : D. Schwartz, R. Mahy, A. Duric, E. Lewis > Filename : > draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement- > 00.txt > Pages : 12 > Date : 2008-2-11 > > This document describes the type of data provisioned among Voice > Service Providers and underscores the need for clearly defined > structures and interfaces to facilitate this provisioning. This work > is > in support of the service provider peering as defined by the > SPEERMINT WG. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schwartz-peppermint- > consolidated-p > rovisioning-problem-statement-00.txt > > > > 2. > Title : A Provisioning Protocol for ENUM-SIP Addressing > Servers > Author(s) : K. Cartwright, et al. > Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt > Pages : 117 > Date : 2008-02-18 > > This document defines a provisioning protocol for ENUM-SIP addressing > servers. This protocol has been recently published as part of > CableLabs(r) PacketCable(tm) specifications. It allows SIP service > providers to provision and manage session establishment data used by SIP > network elements to route SIP sessions to the target destinations which > may > be served by the operator's own internal network or by a session peering > partner. The data provisioned into an ENUM-SIP addressing server is > queried > by SIP entities using ENUM or SIP. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol- > 00.t > xt > > > > 3. A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : Provisioning Protocol Requirements for ENUM-SIP > Addressing Servers > Author(s) : T. Creighton, J. Mule > Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt > Pages : 16 > Date : 2008-02-18 > > This document presents use cases and protocol requirements for > provisioning > ENUM-SIP addressing servers. The provisioned data is used by an > addressing > server to return part of the session establishment data to SIP entities so > that they can route SIP sessions to the target destinations. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp- > requirements- > 00.txt > > > > General Discussion > > The Usual Questions. > > A. Is this a problem that the IETF needs to work on? > > B. Who wants to work on this problem? > > > ************ > > Peppermint Proposed Charter > > Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia > Interconnection. > > Mailing Lists: > > peppermint@ietf.org > > General information about the mailing list is at: > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > > Temporary Area Directorate: Real Time Applications (RAI) > > Ultimate Area Directorate: TBD > > Chairs: TBD > > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based Multimedia > Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF has > done > significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the > translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among > real-time application service providers and how such services interconnect > across administrative boundaries. > > The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to be > exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data > should > be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be outside > the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. These > administrative domains are of any practical size and could be service > providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are > typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or bilateral > or > multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could include bulk data > as well as real time updates. Typical data include mappings of phone > numbers > to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network > interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there is a > specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various types of > network databases. > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing consultation > from > the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group may also > reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. > > The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be > based > on XML documents and XML document exchanges. > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 > > > Richard Shockey > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > NeuStar > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 > PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1C3428CA58; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:04:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.076 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.076 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.639, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GoQ93t2gAAnT; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:04:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2E8728C9AC; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:04:16 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31B2528C6F0 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:04:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ReuRpOCm2cZo for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E90828C9F6 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1LM34ZJ011169 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:03:05 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Cartwright, Kenneth'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:01:34 -0500 Message-ID: <02bf01c874d5$53cf74e0$fb6e5ea0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchwAOjz/M+p+hoER6iikkgRHOlUQgEy3fcAAAIFinA= Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org 4114 comprises many things, both data objects as well as transport protocols EPP etc. Elements might just be parts of 4114 like the XML objects etc .. and the word MAY is just that _maybe_. IETF likes to reuse things if possible, but your point is well taken and review of the charter would be the first order of business in Philadelphia. Frankly I would not have any personal objections to removing the sentence. Something we might hum on. Your comment, in any event, is most welcome. > -----Original Message----- > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Cartwright, Kenneth > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:05 PM > To: peppermint@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 > > Just curious what the thinking is behind this statement in the > charter: > > "The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible." > > This subject was discussed at the last BOF and received little support > (if any at all). So while 4114 certainly need not be ruled out as an > option, singling it out for inclusion the charter of the WG seems (1) > un-necessary, (2) somewhat inappropriate detail for a charter because > it > suggests a partial *solution* when the charter is designed to define > just the scope of the *problem(s)* to be analyzed and solved by the > WG, > and (3) possibly contradictory to a general opinion expressed at the > last BOF. So it seems that the charter would not be harmed by > removing > this statement, but would be improved by removing it. > > Thank you for considering this. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of peppermint-request@ietf.org > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:29 PM > To: peppermint@ietf.org > Subject: PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 > > Send PEPPERMINT mailing list submissions to > peppermint@ietf.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > peppermint-request@ietf.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > peppermint-owner@ietf.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than > "Re: Contents of PEPPERMINT digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Proposed charter V3 (Richard Shockey) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:28:39 -0500 > From: "Richard Shockey" > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] Proposed charter V3 > To: > Message-ID: <017201c87000$964d7a30$c2e86e90$@us> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Comments and flames always welcome. > > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based > Multimedia > Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF > has > done significant work on data exchanges among various network > elements. > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the > translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among > real-time application service providers and how such services > interconnect across administrative boundaries. > > The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to be > exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data > should be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would > be outside the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP > session. These administrative domains are of any practical size and > could be service providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection > are typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or > bilateral or multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could > include bulk data as well as real time updates. Typical data include > mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to > various points of network interconnection and various types of trunk > data. In addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of > such > Registry data to various types of network databases. > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > consultation > from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group > may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. > > The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be > based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 > > > > Richard Shockey > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > NeuStar > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 > 571.434.5651 > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > > End of PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 > ***************************************** > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B3A28CA3F; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:05:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.142 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.142 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.705, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vOb+-3UZHbOc; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:05:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25CE3A6CFE; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 182B23A6CFE; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bl8se1zQEuXU; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:05:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 679543A6CF5; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:05:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1LL4l8e014495 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:48 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: , Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:03:18 -0500 Message-ID: <015201c874cd$2f912c20$8eb38460$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ach0zS6cB16YwuCSR7ex2xvPsYFBBg== Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] Remember Agenda times are PRELIMINARY. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org The final IETF agenda is still somewhat in flux so plan or don't plan accordingly. Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DD9028C4E7; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.518 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ULG6fJ395Rfs; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 918C528C6F0; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:51 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5C228C4E7 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GsUWE2QS4dz4 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from osprey.verisign.com (osprey.verisign.com [216.168.239.75]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5348F28C0FB for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:04:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dul1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (dul1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.170.12.138]) by osprey.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m1LKsw3n001717 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:54:58 -0500 Received: from DUL1WNEXMB05.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.170.12.240]) by dul1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:04:44 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:04:44 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 Thread-Index: AchwAOjz/M+p+hoER6iikkgRHOlUQgEy3fcA From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Feb 2008 21:04:44.0366 (UTC) FILETIME=[622356E0:01C874CD] Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Just curious what the thinking is behind this statement in the charter: "The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible." This subject was discussed at the last BOF and received little support (if any at all). So while 4114 certainly need not be ruled out as an option, singling it out for inclusion the charter of the WG seems (1) un-necessary, (2) somewhat inappropriate detail for a charter because it suggests a partial *solution* when the charter is designed to define just the scope of the *problem(s)* to be analyzed and solved by the WG, and (3) possibly contradictory to a general opinion expressed at the last BOF. So it seems that the charter would not be harmed by removing this statement, but would be improved by removing it. Thank you for considering this. -----Original Message----- From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of peppermint-request@ietf.org Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:29 PM To: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 Send PEPPERMINT mailing list submissions to peppermint@ietf.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to peppermint-request@ietf.org You can reach the person managing the list at peppermint-owner@ietf.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of PEPPERMINT digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Proposed charter V3 (Richard Shockey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:28:39 -0500 From: "Richard Shockey" Subject: [PEPPERMINT] Proposed charter V3 To: Message-ID: <017201c87000$964d7a30$c2e86e90$@us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Comments and flames always welcome. PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF has done significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among real-time application service providers and how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data should be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. These administrative domains are of any practical size and could be service providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or bilateral or multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could include bulk data as well as real time updates. Typical data include mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various types of network databases. The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint End of PEPPERMINT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 17 ***************************************** _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F162128C712; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:50:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.167 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.167 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.730, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YZ0HRa+9AXXD; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:50:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F4E28C579; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:50:45 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831BB28C557 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:50:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qls5Gb3vBELX for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:50:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8864628C462 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:50:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1LKnlDj000626 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:49:48 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:48:17 -0500 Message-ID: <00d901c874cb$1726c8e0$45745aa0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achz5x/jNs+UqwlvTg+8g0X3Ki264Q== Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] First pass at PEPPERMINT BOF #2 Agenda. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Comments Please! ######### IETF 71 PEPPERMINT BOF Agenda 1510-1610 Afternoon Session II WEDNESDAY, March 12, 2008 Breakout Room RAI peppermint Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection BOF Chair(s): Richard Shockey Tom Creighton RAI Director(s): Jon Peterson jon.peterson@neustar.biz Cullen Jennings fluffy@cisco.com Agenda Bashing. Presentation of the proposed charter. 10 min ( see below) 1. Title : Consolidated Provisioning Problem Statement Author(s) : D. Schwartz, R. Mahy, A. Duric, E. Lewis Filename : draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2008-2-11 This document describes the type of data provisioned among Voice Service Providers and underscores the need for clearly defined structures and interfaces to facilitate this provisioning. This work is in support of the service provider peering as defined by the SPEERMINT WG. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-p rovisioning-problem-statement-00.txt 2. Title : A Provisioning Protocol for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : K. Cartwright, et al. Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt Pages : 117 Date : 2008-02-18 This document defines a provisioning protocol for ENUM-SIP addressing servers. This protocol has been recently published as part of CableLabs(r) PacketCable(tm) specifications. It allows SIP service providers to provision and manage session establishment data used by SIP network elements to route SIP sessions to the target destinations which may be served by the operator's own internal network or by a session peering partner. The data provisioned into an ENUM-SIP addressing server is queried by SIP entities using ENUM or SIP. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.t xt 3. A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Provisioning Protocol Requirements for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : T. Creighton, J. Mule Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2008-02-18 This document presents use cases and protocol requirements for provisioning ENUM-SIP addressing servers. The provisioned data is used by an addressing server to return part of the session establishment data to SIP entities so that they can route SIP sessions to the target destinations. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements- 00.txt General Discussion The Usual Questions. A. Is this a problem that the IETF needs to work on? B. Who wants to work on this problem? ************ Peppermint Proposed Charter Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia Interconnection. Mailing Lists: peppermint@ietf.org General information about the mailing list is at: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Temporary Area Directorate: Real Time Applications (RAI) Ultimate Area Directorate: TBD Chairs: TBD PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF has done significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among real-time application service providers and how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data should be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. These administrative domains are of any practical size and could be service providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or bilateral or multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could include bulk data as well as real time updates. Typical data include mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various types of network databases. The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF83128CAF6; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:20:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.031 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.031 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.295, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, SARE_RECV_BEZEQINT_B=0.763] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z19ZkQt0SWhr; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:20:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0B828CACD; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:20:19 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F4328C74D for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:20:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SvnEMMjhdKQ6 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:20:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.183]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A2B928CAC9 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:20:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.198] (bzq-219-131-200.static.bezeqint.net [62.219.131.200]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu6) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0ML29c-1JS8X61YO4-0006dL; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:20:05 +0100 Message-Id: From: David Schwartz To: Paul Erkkila In-Reply-To: <47BA5179.3080200@erkkila.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915) Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:20:00 +0200 References: <47BA5179.3080200@erkkila.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915) X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+LGEahk/kH0qZb5T2MBl+wHx6zBENk83/NiIp tP6sH7kGj3vZneda4Jgh2O2pTu5X+D1C7w7741widcUO9NZzPf GkddfvQJ8+uUTlU5esw4Q== Cc: peppermint@ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] small question on draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Hi Paul. The goal was to have this consistent with public DNS - hence the requirement. once some specific querier has responsibility data, it can use another service to further refine things. D. On Feb 19, 2008, at 5:48 AM, Paul Erkkila wrote: > > Section 4.ends with "It is important to note that the registry is > expected to return the same responsibility data for all parties that > query it." > > Was there any particular reason that language was in there. There > isn't > any explanation around it so I was just curious. Possibly something I > missed on speermint? > > > -pee > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4D63A6DD1; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jiuSL0XBNOxg; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 455663A6BBC; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:16 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12D413A6DBB for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z19DAdEiBmYs for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from erkkila.org (services.erkkila.org [24.97.94.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 599383A6BBC for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.1.25] (t61pee.erkkila.org [::ffff:10.1.1.25]) (AUTH: PLAIN pee@erkkila.org, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by erkkila.org with esmtp; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:48:11 +0000 id 001FF3E0.47BA517B.00003B95 Message-ID: <47BA5179.3080200@erkkila.org> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:48:09 -0500 From: Paul Erkkila User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: peppermint@ietf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Subject: [PEPPERMINT] small question on draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Section 4.ends with "It is important to note that the registry is expected to return the same responsibility data for all parties that query it." Was there any particular reason that language was in there. There isn't any explanation around it so I was just curious. Possibly something I missed on speermint? -pee _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E2243A6D8D; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.032 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.032 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.595, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gFqJktqrk48L; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 344643A6D84; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:47 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDC93A6963; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lDtNBeSPJj1L; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1FB3A6D91; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-35.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1IMboIn032524 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:37:52 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: , Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:36:37 -0500 Message-ID: <135201c8727e$ba0fe9f0$2e2fbdd0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achyesn22bGixofXQs+M5jw+I91bggAA+f8g Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: I-D Action:draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----Original Message----- From: i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 5:00 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Provisioning Protocol Requirements for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : T. Creighton, J. Mule Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2008-02-18 This document presents use cases and protocol requirements for provisioning ENUM-SIP addressing servers. The provisioned data is used by an addressing server to return part of the session establishment data to SIP entities so that they can route SIP sessions to the target destinations. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements- 00.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. ------=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="ATT04878.dat" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT04878.dat" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18135422.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt ------=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-mule-peppermint-espp-requirements-00.txt" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18135422.I-D\@ietf.org> ------=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0 Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT04881.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT04881.txt" _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce ------=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint ------=_NextPart_000_1353_01C87254.D139E1F0-- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769B228C3C6; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.045 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.045 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.608, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8FN209DHbHXx; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98B928C32B; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:35 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C2A43A6934; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9079TnOrfgyB; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C74E3A6963; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-35.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1IMbap2032297 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:37:37 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: , Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:36:22 -0500 Message-ID: <134e01c8727e$b1bfec50$153fc4f0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchyeyXAX9PFlZtxTO+6FuemSLONzgAA3iuQ Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: I-D Action:draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----Original Message----- From: i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 5:00 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : A Provisioning Protocol for ENUM-SIP Addressing Servers Author(s) : K. Cartwright, et al. Filename : draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt Pages : 117 Date : 2008-02-18 This document defines a provisioning protocol for ENUM-SIP addressing servers. This protocol has been recently published as part of CableLabs(r) PacketCable(tm) specifications. It allows SIP service providers to provision and manage session establishment data used by SIP network elements to route SIP sessions to the target destinations which may be served by the operator's own internal network or by a session peering partner. The data provisioned into an ENUM-SIP addressing server is queried by SIP entities using ENUM or SIP. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.t xt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. ------=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="ATT04896.dat" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT04896.dat" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18135556.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt ------=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-mule-peppermint-espp-protocol-00.txt" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18135556.I-D\@ietf.org> ------=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450 Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT04899.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT04899.txt" _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce ------=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint ------=_NextPart_000_134F_01C87254.C8E9E450-- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A2A73A6C4F; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:17:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.313 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.313 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.876, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2QPO+bzhQUHI; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:17:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A43ED3A6C32; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:17:21 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7DDA3A6C2D; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:17:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gJ2cFRSlow+O; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:17:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9E03A6C29; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:17:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-35.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1I2GJDe014879 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:16:21 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:15:13 -0500 Message-ID: <003a01c871d4$198e9800$4cabc800$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achwyp2b3FWwr9y9Edy9QwAUURi4IgBCWxpw Content-Language: en-us X-SongbirdInformation: support@songbird.com for more information X-Songbird: Clean X-Songbird-From: richard@shockey.us Cc: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: Correction: Internet-Drafts Submission Cutoff Deadline for the 71st IETF Meeting in Philadelphia, PA, USA X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org -----Original Message----- From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexa Morris Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 1:35 PM To: ietf-announce@ietf.org Subject: Correction: Internet-Drafts Submission Cutoff Deadline for the 71st IETF Meeting in Philadelphia, PA, USA On February 1st, an automated email reminder went to everyone on this email list that contained incorrect deadline information for Internet-Draft submissions. There are two (2) Internet-Draft cutoff dates for the 71st IETF Meeting in Philadelphia, PA, USA: All initial Internet-Drafts (version -00) must be submitted by this Monday, February 18th at 5pm ET (22:00 UTC/GMT). The only exception is for version -00 WG drafts that replace existing non-WG drafts. Such drafts may be submitted until the cutoff date for version -01 and higher drafts. All revised Internet-Drafts (version -01 and higher) must be submitted by Monday, February 25th at 5pm ET (22:00 UTC/GMT). Version -00 WG drafts that replace existing non-WG drafts must be submitted by this cutoff date as well. This information, as well as other significant dates for the 71st IETF Meeting, can be found at http://www.ietf.org/meetings/71-cutoff_dates.html. We apologize for any confusion this deadline discrepancy may have caused you. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to send a message to internet-drafts@ietf.org. You are also welcome to contact me directly at any time. Kind regards, Alexa Morris ----------- Alexa Morris / Executive Director / IETF 48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117, Fremont, CA 94538 Phone: +1.510.492.4089 / Fax: +1.510.492.4001 Email: amorris@amsl.com Managed by Association Management Solutions (AMS) Forum Management, Meeting and Event Planning www.amsl.com _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D1393A6B85; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:29:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.455 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1PGmXBibWM8p; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:29:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6C628D05A; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:29:21 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9D93A6B5E for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:29:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hj-L7y4TPhUr for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:29:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 265873A6B8C for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:28:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1FITbIU032036 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:29:38 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:28:39 -0500 Message-ID: <017201c87000$964d7a30$c2e86e90$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchwAJVtNqSXYLoxSGqw8mGMyLTsAQ== Content-Language: en-us Subject: [PEPPERMINT] Proposed charter V3 X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Comments and flames always welcome. PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF has done significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among real-time application service providers and how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. The PEPPERMINT work group is chartered to define what data needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains, and how that data should be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. These administrative domains are of any practical size and could be service providers or enterprise SIP proxy's, such as PBX's. Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are typically between various Client User Agents and Registries or bilateral or multilateral Registry to Registry. Data exchanges could include bulk data as well as real time updates. Typical data include mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various types of network databases. The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB933A6B83; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AGocTq4pd9BM; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BD263A6B3C; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:20 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D873A6B67 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XLMQ-nv0D6ZH for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21F323A6B6A for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1FIRtkx029814 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:27:57 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Paul Erkkila'" References: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> <47B1FBA3.70906@erkkila.org> In-Reply-To: <47B1FBA3.70906@erkkila.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:26:56 -0500 Message-ID: <017101c87000$59cdce70$0d696b50$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchtskzKWI/nCE7wRX2uhOkrY/ASrACTYb1A Content-Language: en-us Cc: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org, "'Peterson, Jon'" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Apologies for the tardy reply .. in line .. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Erkkila [mailto:pee@erkkila.org] > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 3:04 PM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org; 'Peterson, Jon' > Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. > > Richard Shockey wrote: > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > > > > > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia > Interconnection are > > typically between various Client User Agents and Registries > containing > > mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to > various > > points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. > In > > addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such > Registry data > > to various types of network databases. > > > > 2 questions.. > > 1. Would a service provider be considered a registry in this case? > Making inter-provider data exchanges registry <=> registry as David > commented? Yes .. data exchanges could be either bilateral or multilateral between administrative domains as well as centralized registries.. > > 2. Would the timing aspects of the exchange be important for the > charter? (I'm new to this). Many of the exchanges done today for > instance are "batch" mode file exchanges. Are we looking to cover that > scenario or more real time efforts (or both...)? That is a well known issue and there will be more on this issue forthcoming. Bulk upload and realtime updates are presumed to be in scope. I have noted this in the next iteration of the charter. > > For example in the PSTN world I might be able to instantly tell you > that a block of numbers you are trying to claim was refused for some reason > (it's mine for instance), that would be real time feedback. However > not refusing a block of numbers would not be the same as me telling you > that I've accepted it, and it is in fact now live and usable on my network. Exactly .. _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243CF28C477; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:04:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YsMGt+oMJuEp; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:04:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8C928C4B7; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:03:31 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4B728C4B5 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:03:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q5V7UQtul2Qz for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from erkkila.org (services.erkkila.org [24.97.94.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC3828CEF5 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:02:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.1.223] (dhcp223.dhcp.erkkila.org [::ffff:10.1.1.223]) (AUTH: PLAIN pee@erkkila.org, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by erkkila.org with esmtp; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:03:49 +0000 id 001EB6BD.47B1FBA5.000031D8 Message-ID: <47B1FBA3.70906@erkkila.org> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:03:47 -0500 From: Paul Erkkila User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Shockey References: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> In-Reply-To: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Cc: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org, "'Peterson, Jon'" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Richard Shockey wrote: > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are > typically between various Client User Agents and Registries containing > mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various > points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In > addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such Registry data > to various types of network databases. > 2 questions.. 1. Would a service provider be considered a registry in this case? Making inter-provider data exchanges registry <=> registry as David commented? 2. Would the timing aspects of the exchange be important for the charter? (I'm new to this). Many of the exchanges done today for instance are "batch" mode file exchanges. Are we looking to cover that scenario or more real time efforts (or both...)? For example in the PSTN world I might be able to instantly tell you that a block of numbers you are trying to claim was refused for some reason (it's mine for instance), that would be real time feedback. However not refusing a block of numbers would not be the same as me telling you that I've accepted it, and it is in fact now live and usable on my network. -pee _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 514023A6E83; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:00:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.714 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.714 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.277, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ekWkqWoWpLBg; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:00:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26E493A6D3A; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:00:00 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABAE63A6E5D for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:59:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kAfW4xnKeHWe for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:59:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC5D3A6D3A for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:59:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-35.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1CH0dap024305 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:00:40 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:59:47 -0500 Message-ID: <0b4701c86d98$ad913390$08b39ab0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchtmKxP5BioSw+FTai+f+5oVmUCIg== Content-Language: en-us Cc: "'Peterson, Jon'" Subject: [PEPPERMINT] Tentative slot assignment...request for Agenda Items X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org We have a tentative 2nd BOF session scheduled in Philadelphia. This is subject to change and or cancellation. We have a first iteration of a combined problem statement draft ready to discuss as well as a proposed WG charter. I'd like to know what if any other documents people are planning on submitting. Especially if they involve use cases etc. PEPPERMINT Session 1 (1 hour) Tuesday, Afternoon Session IV 1850-1950 Room Name: Breakout Room ---------------------------------------------- Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758CC28C36F; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.821 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.821 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.384, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gjjybADs8lcj; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 922D83A6D3A; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:05 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C551C3A6D3A for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y+eg3idXO-Wc for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50E13A6CF8 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-35.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1CGqf2F020107 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:52:42 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:51:49 -0500 Message-ID: <0ae101c86d97$90d7a500$b286ef00$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchtDod66Y0+jiYfQZ2kJfo3hIAwYAAiPZ/A Content-Language: en-us Cc: "'Peterson, Jon'" Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org -----Original Message----- From: i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 7:30 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement -00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Consolidated Provisioning Problem Statement Author(s) : D. Schwartz, R. Mahy, A. Duric, E. Lewis Filename : draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2008-2-11 This document describes the type of data provisioned among Voice Service Providers and underscores the need for clearly defined structures and interfaces to facilitate this provisioning. This work is in support of the service provider peering as defined by the SPEERMINT WG. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-p rovisioning-problem-statement-00.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem-statement-00.txt ". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-schwartz-peppermint-consolidated-provisioning-problem -statement-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9277F28C2C5; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.507 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ttAUkSGX5RpZ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CDF83A6A15; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:14 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AA228C298 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nqzd9qEv-VdE for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D185F3A6820 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (h-68-165-240-35.mclnva23.covad.net [68.165.240.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m18EOqxp002020 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 06:24:54 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'DRAGE, Keith \(Keith\)'" , References: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> <5D1A7985295922448D5550C94DE2918001BF741B@DEEXC1U01.de.lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <5D1A7985295922448D5550C94DE2918001BF741B@DEEXC1U01.de.lucent.com> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:24:20 -0500 Message-ID: <181201c86a5e$4d31ab70$e7950250$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achpw30HOkC5ekpTQr6h+vtfhi9wyQAfk28QAAbsCvA= Content-language: en-us Cc: "'Peterson, Jon'" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Short answer YES... administrative domains are assumed to be of any practical size ( which certainly include PBX systems ) so this provisioning protocol could be used by PBX systems to provision ENUM systems with TN to URI mappings, for instance either inter or intra domain or a service provider or TN to URI peering relationships between service providers. This is a excellent point and we can certainly clarify this in subsequent charter iterations. > -----Original Message----- > From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:drage@alcatel-lucent.com] > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 6:03 AM > To: Richard Shockey; PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > Cc: Peterson, Jon > Subject: RE: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. > > Question: Is this work meant to cover all "administrative domains" or > only those above a certain size? > > For example, will the results of this group be applicable to an > enterprise operator with a single IP-PBX with less than a 100 lines > (or > equivalent functionality) and their relationship with a service > provider? > > Regards > > Keith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard Shockey > > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:10 PM > > To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > > Cc: 'Peterson, Jon' > > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. > > > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based > > Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In > > addition, the IETF has done significant work on data > > exchanges among various network elements. > > > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that > > involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current > > practices among real-time application service providers and > > how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. > > > > The PEPPERMINT work group is charted to define what data > > needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains > > and how that data should be structured provisioned and > > propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope > > of establishing various forms of a SIP session. > > > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia > > Interconnection are typically between various Client User > > Agents and Registries containing mappings of phone numbers to > > URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of > > network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In > > addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such > > Registry data to various types of network databases. > > > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > > consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working > > groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC > > 4114, if possible. > > > > The final work product(s) from this working group will > > utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. > > > > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 > > > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 > > > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 > > > > > > Richard Shockey > > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > > NeuStar > > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 > > 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PEPPERMINT mailing list > > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160C528C231; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:02:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fn5WHehZsnIk; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:02:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7660028C209; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:02:21 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD02928C16E for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:02:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 63uDlp0dT9KS for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:02:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C8728C209 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:01:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from ilexp02.ndc.lucent.com (h135-3-39-2.lucent.com [135.3.39.2]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id m18B2jYn022069; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 05:02:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from DEEXP02.DE.lucent.com ([135.248.187.66]) by ilexp02.ndc.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 05:02:45 -0600 Received: from DEEXC1U01.de.lucent.com ([135.248.187.20]) by DEEXP02.DE.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:02:43 +0100 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:02:42 +0100 Message-ID: <5D1A7985295922448D5550C94DE2918001BF741B@DEEXC1U01.de.lucent.com> In-Reply-To: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. Thread-index: Achpw30HOkC5ekpTQr6h+vtfhi9wyQAfk28Q References: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> From: "DRAGE, Keith \(Keith\)" To: "Richard Shockey" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Feb 2008 11:02:43.0324 (UTC) FILETIME=[20F2FBC0:01C86A42] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37 Cc: "Peterson, Jon" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Question: Is this work meant to cover all "administrative domains" or only those above a certain size? For example, will the results of this group be applicable to an enterprise operator with a single IP-PBX with less than a 100 lines (or equivalent functionality) and their relationship with a service provider? Regards Keith > -----Original Message----- > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard Shockey > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:10 PM > To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > Cc: 'Peterson, Jon' > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based > Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In > addition, the IETF has done significant work on data > exchanges among various network elements. > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that > involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current > practices among real-time application service providers and > how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. > > The PEPPERMINT work group is charted to define what data > needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains > and how that data should be structured provisioned and > propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope > of establishing various forms of a SIP session. > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia > Interconnection are typically between various Client User > Agents and Registries containing mappings of phone numbers to > URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of > network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In > addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such > Registry data to various types of network databases. > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working > groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC > 4114, if possible. > > The final work product(s) from this working group will > utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 > > > Richard Shockey > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > NeuStar > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 > 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98D983A7E76; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:34:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.782 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.782 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.704, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, SARE_RECV_BEZEQINT_B=0.763] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t7961Fdqv6sL; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:34:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ADB03A7E74; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:34:37 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9EA3A7ECD for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:34:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sp6xSqROHVWz for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:34:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.186]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3D83A7E2C for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:34:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.193] (bzq-219-131-200.static.bezeqint.net [62.219.131.200]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu5) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0ML25U-1JNI9W3Tax-0005nX; Fri, 08 Feb 2008 02:35:43 +0100 Message-Id: From: David Schwartz To: Richard Shockey In-Reply-To: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v912) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:35:42 +0200 References: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.912) X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19syz4bLf28zTAM+xzZAc8I7x8qK8v6c3yDKfW LF6xmCG3CXS2jMrddjBO2Ls01FY8yP7fdEp4FnJ785F9ljaKtW +liA00TObod2AyvXo8dJg== Cc: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org, "Peterson, Jon" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org comments inline... On Feb 7, 2008, at 10:10 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based > Multimedia > Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF > has done > significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the > translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among > real-time application service providers and how such services > interconnect > across administrative boundaries. > > The PEPPERMINT work group is charted to define what data needs to be Chartered not Charted > > exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains and how that data > should > be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be > outside > the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. > > Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia > Interconnection are > typically between various Client User Agents and Registries containing > mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to > various > points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In > addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such > Registry data > to various types of network databases. How about registry - registry (i.e registry data exchange/query) > > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > consultation from > the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group > may also > reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. > > The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and > be based > on XML documents and XML document exchanges. > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 > > > Richard Shockey > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > NeuStar > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 > PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636FE3A7BD2; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:12:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.419 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bgKOhxIENV19; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:12:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F0C3A7B44; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:10:57 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 768FE3A7B5F for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:10:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BXzo5z4MkZnO for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:10:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB89C3A7CD8 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:10:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m17KAgK0012676 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:10:43 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:10:16 -0500 Message-ID: <0d7001c869c5$7592d510$60b87f30$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achpw30HOkC5ekpTQr6h+vtfhi9wyQ== Content-Language: en-us Cc: "'Peterson, Jon'" Subject: [PEPPERMINT] 2nd pass on PEPPERMINT charter. X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT The IETF has been working on various aspects of session-based Multimedia Interconnection among administrative domains. In addition, the IETF has done significant work on data exchanges among various network elements. ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among real-time application service providers and how such services interconnect across administrative boundaries. The PEPPERMINT work group is charted to define what data needs to be exchanged among Multimedia administrative domains and how that data should be structured provisioned and propagated. These protocols would be outside the normal scope of establishing various forms of a SIP session. Data exchanges to facilitate session-based Multimedia Interconnection are typically between various Client User Agents and Registries containing mappings of phone numbers to URIs, policies surrounding admission to various points of network interconnection and various types of trunk data. In addition, there is a specific need for redistribution of such Registry data to various types of network databases. The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. The working group may also reuse elements of RFC 4114, if possible. The final work product(s) from this working group will utilize and be based on XML documents and XML document exchanges. PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. Sept 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Nov 08 Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Feb 09 Richard Shockey Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209683A6A2A; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:17:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.965 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.965 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.366, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wp2R9KKyxeKq; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:17:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615A43A76B7; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:17:25 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5A143A6A2A for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:17:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CCfOSvnUwXoy for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:17:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC10C3A7928 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:16:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m17GGoW3007176 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:16:51 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:16:25 -0500 Message-ID: <098d01c869a4$ca60e580$5f22b080$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acho3fVtEVBU3sbuT86jEPDN5cT0ogAkS1mwAAAcvWAADNM0kA== Content-Language: en-us Cc: "'Ersue, Mehmet \(NSN - DE/Muenich\)'" Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] FW: potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2021348796==" Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. --===============2021348796== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_098E_01C8697A.E18ADD80" Content-Language: en-us This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_098E_01C8697A.E18ADD80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The sentence on the issue of NETCONF was only meant to be illustrative of the fact that the IETF continues to work on issues involving the provisioning of data in various network elements. I'm going to remove that sentence since it is clearly causing confusion. The issue the WG is dealing with (and was strongly confirmed in the first BOF) is that various aspects of RFC 4114 are insufficient or inappropriate for the provisioning of various data sets required by multi media interconnection databases. It is not as simple as ENUM/DNS registry provisioning. The relationships between various provisioning entities like PBX systems, SIP CUA's, carrier OSS systems and network elements such as SIP proxys and or Session border controllers are more diverse and the relationships more complex. The forthcoming requirements/problem statement ID make that clear. From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 4:58 AM To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org Cc: Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Muenich) Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT One more comment about the charter proposal from Mehmet Ersue, co-chair of the NETCONF WG. Please copy Mehmet on responses, as he is not subscribed to the peppermint list. Dan ---------------------------------------------- Hi All, I fully agree with Margaret that the choice of the technology needs to be a group consensus. Since IETF and IESG are always interested to use already existing protocols if they are suitable to do the job I'm pretty much interested to hear the concrete arguments why the gateway configuration cannot be done with NETCONF over SOAP. NETCONF is a suitable protocol for network element configuration and configuration data exchange. NETCONF is also reliable and supports notification and transaction mechanisms. BTW: NETCONF over SOAP is not heavy-weight. NETCONF is already available as a standard and has been implemented many times. Already different companies are using it in their products. You don't get all these functionalities for free. It takes usually many years of hard work to develop the standard documents and get them stable based on implementations. This is the reason why IESG is usually keen of using already existing IETF technologies instead of starting another overlapping work which takes years to finalize. So, please tell me, what are the hard-reasons for not using an existing technology? Cheers, Mehmet Ersue > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org > [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Margaret > Wasserman > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:29 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org; netconf@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT > > > By "NETCFG", does Richard mean NETCONF? > > I would prefer to see the line removed that states that "bias > will be > given" to particular solutions. I think it is okay to charter a > group with restrictions on the solution space, such as "will > be based > on XML" if there is consensus to do so, but I'm not sure what it > would mean to charter a group and require that they be "biased" > towards certain solutions. If there isn't consensus that the > solution must be based on one of the technologies listed, I think > that line should be removed and the choice of technology should be a > group consensus decision. > > Margaret > ------=_NextPart_000_098E_01C8697A.E18ADD80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The sentence on the issue of NETCONF was only meant to be illustrative of the fact that the IETF continues to work on issues = involving the provisioning of data in various network elements. I’m going to = remove that sentence since it is clearly causing = confusion.

 

The issue the WG is dealing with (and was strongly = confirmed in the first BOF)  is that various aspects of RFC 4114 are = insufficient or inappropriate for the provisioning of various data sets required by = multi media interconnection databases.

 

It is not as simple as ENUM/DNS registry provisioning. = The relationships between various provisioning entities like PBX systems, = SIP CUA’s,  carrier OSS systems and network elements  such as SIP proxys = and or Session border controllers are more diverse and the relationships more = complex.

 

The forthcoming requirements/problem statement ID make = that clear.

 

From:= peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 4:58 AM
To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org
Cc: Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Muenich)
Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: potenntial charter for = PEPPERMINT

 

One more comment about the charter proposal from Mehmet = Ersue, co-chair of the NETCONF WG.

 

Please copy Mehmet on responses, as he is not subscribed to = the peppermint list.

 

Dan

 

----------------------------------------------



 


Hi All,

I fully agree with Margaret that the choice of the technology needs
to be a group consensus.

Since IETF and IESG are always interested to use already existing
protocols if they are suitable to do the job I'm pretty much interested = to
hear the concrete arguments why the gateway configuration cannot be
done with NETCONF over SOAP.

NETCONF is a suitable protocol for network element configuration and =
configuration data exchange. NETCONF is also reliable and supports
notification and transaction mechanisms. BTW: NETCONF over SOAP
is not heavy-weight.

NETCONF is already available as a standard and has been implemented
many times. Already different companies are using it in their = products.

You don't get all these functionalities for free. It takes usually many = years
of hard work to develop the standard documents and get them stable based =
on implementations.

This is the reason why IESG is usually keen of using already existing = IETF
technologies instead of starting another overlapping work which takes = years
to finalize.

So, please tell me, what are the hard-reasons for not using an existing =
technology?

Cheers,
Mehmet Ersue
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org
> [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Margaret
> Wasserman
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:29 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org; netconf@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT
>
>
> By "NETCFG", does Richard mean NETCONF?
>
> I would prefer to see the line removed that states that "bias =
> will be 
> given" to particular solutions.  I think it is okay to = charter a 
> group with restrictions on the solution space, such as "will =
> be based 
> on XML" if there is consensus to do so, but I'm not sure what it 
> would mean to charter a group and require that they be "biased" 
> towards certain solutions.  If there isn't consensus that = the 
> solution must be based on one of the technologies listed, I = think 
> that line should be removed and the choice of technology should be = a 
> group consensus decision.
>
> Margaret
>

------=_NextPart_000_098E_01C8697A.E18ADD80-- --===============2021348796== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint --===============2021348796==-- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39BCA3A7A28; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:02:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mm6S2kg-n3+A; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:02:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D0E3A7A74; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:02:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB0663A7A84 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:02:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7lIUUMY27MZQ for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:02:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.songbird.com (mail.songbird.com [208.184.79.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0E03A7AAD for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:01:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from rshockeyPC (neustargw.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.songbird.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m17G2Aeq025422 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 08:02:11 -0800 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:01:45 -0500 Message-ID: <098c01c869a2$be308b50$3a91a1f0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acho1PleRMv9D5gdTXCfd1mEGA8lcAAe+URAABReaWA= Content-Language: en-us Cc: margaret@thingmagic.com Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] FW: potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org I meant NETCONF .. a pure typo. The comment on the use of bias is also perfectly reasonable and I'll remove that. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret@thingmagic.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 5:29 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org; netconf@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT > > > By "NETCFG", does Richard mean NETCONF? > > I would prefer to see the line removed that states that "bias will be > given" to particular solutions. I think it is okay to charter a group > with restrictions on the solution space, such as "will be based on > XML" > if there is consensus to do so, but I'm not sure what it would mean to > charter a group and require that they be "biased" > towards certain solutions. If there isn't consensus that the solution > must be based on one of the technologies listed, I think that line > should be removed and the choice of technology should be a group > consensus decision. > > Margaret > > > > On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:30 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > > > > > Comments are welcome. > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint- > bounces@ietf.org] > > On Behalf Of Richard Shockey > > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:06 AM > > To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT > > > > > > Folks ..we had a successful BOF in Vancouver in order to progress > the > > work towards a full charter by the IETF it is necessary to reach > > consensus on a charter. > > > > I have a proposal for a charter here below. I welcome comments > public > > private etc. > > > > > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of Multi-Media > > Interconnection among administrative domains. > > > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the > > translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among > > real-time application service providers and how such services > > interconnect across administrative boundaries. > > > > These forms of interconnection will require various forms of data to > > be exchanged among administrative domains outside the normal scope > of > > establishing various SIP sessions. > > > > The IETF has, in the past done, significant work on data exchanges > > among various network elements. PROVREG and NETCFG being the most > > prominent recent examples. > > > > Data exchanges to facilitate Multi-Media Interconnection are > typically > > > between various Client User Agents and Registries containing > mappings > > of phone numbers to URI's, policies surrounding admission to points > of > > > network interconnection and various types of trunking data. In > > addition there is a specific need for redistribution of Registry > data > > to various types of network databases. > > > > The proposed PEPPERMINT working group will build upon the knowledge > > and expertise of the PROVREG, ENUM and SPEERMINT working groups. The > > goal of the WG is to find a provisioning solution for > interconnection > > to be ultimately used by SPEERMINT. The working group may also reuse > > elements of RFC 4114 if possible. > > > > The final work product(s) from this working group will be based upon > > XML. > > > > Additionally, bias will be given to using, HTTP/REST, HTTP/XML-RPC, > or > > > HTTP/SOAP. > > > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > > consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. > > > > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. July 08 > > > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Sep 08 > > > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Dec 08 > > > > > > Richard Shockey > > Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak > Plaza > > > - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 > > 571.434.5651 > > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PEPPERMINT mailing list > > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > > > -- > > to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with > > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. > > archive: > > > This email was protected during delivery to Avaya with TLS encryption > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BAD3A76B0; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:56:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.558 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.063, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UnG+1N1p02Wf; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:56:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1EF73A765B; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:56:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8915B3A7613 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:56:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ni-q5Trkjzn5 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:56:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (unknown [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1AE03A7589 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 01:56:27 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,315,1199682000"; d="scan'208,217";a="91424658" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 04:57:56 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,315,1199682000"; d="scan'208,217";a="152119196" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 04:57:39 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 10:57:35 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT Thread-Index: Acho3fVtEVBU3sbuT86jEPDN5cT0ogAkS1mwAAAcvWA= From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Cc: "Ersue, Mehmet \(NSN - DE/Muenich\)" Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0989597415==" Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============0989597415== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8696F.DE2AA50E" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C8696F.DE2AA50E Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One more comment about the charter proposal from Mehmet Ersue, co-chair of the NETCONF WG.=20 =20 Please copy Mehmet on responses, as he is not subscribed to the peppermint list.=20 =20 Dan =20 ---------------------------------------------- =20 Hi All, =09 I fully agree with Margaret that the choice of the technology needs=20 to be a group consensus. =09 Since IETF and IESG are always interested to use already existing=20 protocols if they are suitable to do the job I'm pretty much interested to=20 hear the concrete arguments why the gateway configuration cannot be=20 done with NETCONF over SOAP. =09 NETCONF is a suitable protocol for network element configuration and=20 configuration data exchange. NETCONF is also reliable and supports=20 notification and transaction mechanisms. BTW: NETCONF over SOAP=20 is not heavy-weight. =09 NETCONF is already available as a standard and has been implemented=20 many times. Already different companies are using it in their products. =09 You don't get all these functionalities for free. It takes usually many years=20 of hard work to develop the standard documents and get them stable based=20 on implementations. =09 This is the reason why IESG is usually keen of using already existing IETF=20 technologies instead of starting another overlapping work which takes years to finalize. =09 So, please tell me, what are the hard-reasons for not using an existing=20 technology? =09 Cheers,=20 Mehmet Ersue =20 =09 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org=20 > [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Margaret=20 > Wasserman > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:29 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org; netconf@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT >=20 >=20 > By "NETCFG", does Richard mean NETCONF? >=20 > I would prefer to see the line removed that states that "bias=20 > will be =20 > given" to particular solutions. I think it is okay to charter a =20 > group with restrictions on the solution space, such as "will=20 > be based =20 > on XML" if there is consensus to do so, but I'm not sure what it =20 > would mean to charter a group and require that they be "biased" =20 > towards certain solutions. If there isn't consensus that the > solution must be based on one of the technologies listed, I think =20 > that line should be removed and the choice of technology should be a =20 > group consensus decision. >=20 > Margaret >=20 =09 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C8696F.DE2AA50E Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
One more comment about the charter proposal = from Mehmet=20 Ersue, co-chair of the NETCONF WG.
 
Please copy Mehmet on responses, as he is not = subscribed to the peppermint list.
 
Dan
 
----------------------------------------------=


 

Hi All,

I fully agree with Margaret that the choice of = the=20 technology needs
to be a group consensus.

Since IETF and = IESG are=20 always interested to use already existing
protocols if they are = suitable=20 to do the job I'm pretty much interested to
hear the concrete = arguments=20 why the gateway configuration cannot be
done with NETCONF over=20 SOAP.

NETCONF is a suitable protocol for network element = configuration=20 and
configuration data exchange. NETCONF is also reliable and = supports=20
notification and transaction mechanisms. BTW: NETCONF over SOAP =
is not=20 heavy-weight.

NETCONF is already available as a standard and = has been=20 implemented
many times. Already different companies are using it = in their=20 products.

You don't get all these functionalities for free. It = takes=20 usually many years
of hard work to develop the standard documents = and get=20 them stable based
on implementations.

This is the reason = why IESG=20 is usually keen of using already existing IETF
technologies = instead of=20 starting another overlapping work which takes years
to = finalize.

So,=20 please tell me, what are the hard-reasons for not using an existing=20
technology?

Cheers,
Mehmet Ersue
 

>=20 -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org =
>=20 [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Margaret
> = Wasserman
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:29 PM
> = To:=20 Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org;=20 netconf@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial = charter for=20 PEPPERMINT
>
>
> By "NETCFG", does Richard mean=20 NETCONF?
>
> I would prefer to see the line removed that = states=20 that "bias
> will be 
> given" to particular=20 solutions.  I think it is okay to charter a 
> group = with=20 restrictions on the solution space, such as "will
> be = based =20
> on XML" if there is consensus to do so, but I'm not sure what = it 
> would mean to charter a group and require that they = be=20 "biased" 
> towards certain solutions.  If there = isn't=20 consensus that the 
> solution must be based on one of the = technologies listed, I think 
> that line should be = removed and=20 the choice of technology should be a 
> group consensus=20 decision.
>
> Margaret
>=20
------_=_NextPart_001_01C8696F.DE2AA50E-- --===============0989597415== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint --===============0989597415==-- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF753A7444; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:15:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.113 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.618, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z9R3fsgi17Ts; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:15:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2427E3A7083; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:15:53 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4654E3A67ED for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:15:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Ksjc5OLWuOk for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:15:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com (unknown [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AD03A70E2 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:15:51 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,315,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="98154636" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 01:17:21 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,315,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="159243977" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 01:17:20 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 07:16:57 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT Thread-Index: Acho1PleRMv9D5gdTXCfd1mEGA8lcAAe+URA From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Cc: margaret@thingmagic.com Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Please see below a comment from OPS-DIR member Margaret Wasserman. Dan -----Original Message----- From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret@thingmagic.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 5:29 PM To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org; netconf@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT By "NETCFG", does Richard mean NETCONF? I would prefer to see the line removed that states that "bias will be given" to particular solutions. I think it is okay to charter a group with restrictions on the solution space, such as "will be based on XML" if there is consensus to do so, but I'm not sure what it would mean to charter a group and require that they be "biased" towards certain solutions. If there isn't consensus that the solution must be based on one of the technologies listed, I think that line should be removed and the choice of technology should be a group consensus decision. Margaret On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:30 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > > Comments are welcome. > > Dan > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:peppermint-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Richard Shockey > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:06 AM > To: PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > Subject: [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT > > > Folks ..we had a successful BOF in Vancouver in order to progress the > work towards a full charter by the IETF it is necessary to reach > consensus on a charter. > > I have a proposal for a charter here below. I welcome comments public > private etc. > > > PROPOSED CHARTER FOR PEPPERMINT > > The IETF has been working on various aspects of Multi-Media > Interconnection among administrative domains. > > ENUM is specifically chartered to develop protocols that involve the > translation of E.164 numbers to URI's. > > SPEERMINT has been chartered to develop best current practices among > real-time application service providers and how such services > interconnect across administrative boundaries. > > These forms of interconnection will require various forms of data to > be exchanged among administrative domains outside the normal scope of > establishing various SIP sessions. > > The IETF has, in the past done, significant work on data exchanges > among various network elements. PROVREG and NETCFG being the most > prominent recent examples. > > Data exchanges to facilitate Multi-Media Interconnection are typically > between various Client User Agents and Registries containing mappings > of phone numbers to URI's, policies surrounding admission to points of > network interconnection and various types of trunking data. In > addition there is a specific need for redistribution of Registry data > to various types of network databases. > > The proposed PEPPERMINT working group will build upon the knowledge > and expertise of the PROVREG, ENUM and SPEERMINT working groups. The > goal of the WG is to find a provisioning solution for interconnection > to be ultimately used by SPEERMINT. The working group may also reuse > elements of RFC 4114 if possible. > > The final work product(s) from this working group will be based upon > XML. > > Additionally, bias will be given to using, HTTP/REST, HTTP/XML-RPC, or > HTTP/SOAP. > > The working group will draw upon expert advice and ongoing > consultation from the ENUM, SPEERMINT and PROVREG working groups. > > > PROPOSED GOALS AND MILESTONES > > > Requirements for Interconnection data exchanges. July 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data registries. Sep 08 > > Provisioning of Interconnection data caches. Dec 08 > > > Richard Shockey > Director, Member of the Technical Staff NeuStar 46000 Center Oak Plaza > - Sterling, VA 20166 PSTN Office +1 > 571.434.5651 > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PEPPERMINT mailing list > PEPPERMINT@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint > > -- > to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. > archive: This email was protected during delivery to Avaya with TLS encryption _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-peppermint-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1E23A70E2; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:13:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.145 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v+AmdodNaxad; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:13:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FF3C3A6E74; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:13:07 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: peppermint@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB113A6CF0 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:13:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hmeZhf-dxnST for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:13:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com (unknown [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF25E3A6CA1 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:13:05 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,315,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="98154291" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 01:14:35 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,315,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="159243577" Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 01:14:34 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 07:14:16 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [OPS-DIR] [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT Thread-Index: Acho1QRUxvBOizCBRfOkfDjVD1glogAB/QhAABzdoCA= From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Cc: David B Harrington Subject: [PEPPERMINT] FW: [OPS-DIR] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT X-BeenThere: peppermint@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Provisioning Extensions in Peering Registries for Multimedia INTerconnection List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: peppermint-bounces@ietf.org Please see below a comment from OPS-DIR member David Harrington. Regards, Dan -----Original Message----- From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Harrington Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 7:12 PM To: 'Margaret Wasserman'; Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; netconf@ops.ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org Subject: RE: [OPS-DIR] [PEPPERMINT] potenntial charter for PEPPERMINT Hi, A Google search shows NETCFG to be an open-source GUI-based application for configuring networks. I would be very concerned if the charter calls for a solution "biased" toward a vendor-specific offering, even if the vendor uses open-source and the MIT license, since we are supposed to develop vendor-neutral standards, and biased != neutral. If the intention was to reference NETCONF, then I have a concern that the expressed bias is to favor a non-mandatory-to-implement "transport" for NETCONF. I agree that the line expressing a bias for certain solutions should be removed. I would not object to a line expressing a constraint for solutions that leverage existing IETF standards for certain aspects, such as security. But I'm not sure I know what is to be delivered well enough to know how existing standards could be leveraged. Overall, I find the charter wording to be too ambiguous to adequately describe the scope of the work to be done. "find a provisioning solution for interconnection" does not seem sufficiently focused to identify the expected deliverables. Is this WG chartered to produce a protocol, some data models, functionality to manage caches? I'm just not really sure what is being proposed as deliverables, and would be hard pressed to know when the WG drifted off-topic or completed their work. I think the charter wording and scope needs to be tightened significantly to make this engineering-ready. David Harrington dbharrington@comcast.net ietfdbh@comcast.net dharrington@huawei.com _______________________________________________ PEPPERMINT mailing list PEPPERMINT@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint