From spromano@unina.it Wed Oct 5 08:13:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dcon@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dcon@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533E421F8D43; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 08:13:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.341 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.341 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.222, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LqMAaCMoNsMX; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 08:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.unina.it (smtp2.unina.it [192.132.34.62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3701B21F8D44; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 08:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [143.225.229.230] ([143.225.229.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp2.unina.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p95FG3r2026236 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:16:05 +0200 Message-ID: <4E8C74B0.1080505@unina.it> Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 17:16:00 +0200 From: Simon Pietro Romano User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; it; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110920 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dcon@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: DISPATCH Subject: [dcon] DCON discussion material X-BeenThere: dcon@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Conferencing BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 15:13:00 -0000 Hi all, following the recent discussions about Distributed Conferencing (for which, as you might know, a BOF at IETF 82 has been proposed), I'm sending you three references to Internet Drafts we submitted some time ago and which should help position the proposed idea in the context of what has already been achieved within the IETF (XCON in particular). These I-Ds clearly represent just preliminary thoughts, which might be completely re-designed should the IETF decide to start working on this topic, but they nonetheless stand there as a first attempt at addressing the issues we identified so far. Here are the documents I'm referring to: 1. Requirements for Distributed Conferencing --> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-requirements-09 2. A Framework for Distributed Conferencing --> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-framework-09 3. Requirements for the XCON-DCON Synchronization Protocol --> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-xdsp-reqs-09 I hope this can help foster discussion on the brand new non-WG list that has been recently created. I'm CC:ing DISPATCH, since this is where the DCON story comes from. Cheers, Simon -- _\\|//_ ( O-O ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o00~~(_)~~00o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Simon Pietro Romano Universita' di Napoli Federico II Computer Science Department Phone: +39 081 7683823 -- Fax: +39 081 7684219 e-mail: spromano@unina.it http://www.comics.unina.it/simonpietro.romano <>. Magritte. oooO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( )~~ Oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Wed Oct 5 09:13:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dcon@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dcon@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 957BF11E8083; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:13:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.96 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id scUD8mceccnW; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:13:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBE8121F8BEB; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:13:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so2099285gyd.31 for ; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 09:16:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=B6nPq8xKoGq7mXUCn8hkXpAm4Gxw0qsd8vxf/B7pRRE=; b=sfPh5QyjsOYKRHz8vSs7bO/cBzbxAqnCjvU8kuPsVmmImwwhXoACNH/ai5uYuoEtlX IB8pu5JAaKV40hJszlRvL3y11A+ZEGiRDKxu3vlFVxFl4+AWpXbkgp8dZi3STWVjfVwI WV62txepBZ3CUY2E50gd1HfH8pZ9N7khxyeng= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.164.16 with SMTP id m16mr2600922ybe.197.1317831382431; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 09:16:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.98.20 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:16:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E8C74B0.1080505@unina.it> References: <4E8C74B0.1080505@unina.it> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 12:16:22 -0400 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Simon Pietro Romano Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dcon@ietf.org, DISPATCH Subject: Re: [dcon] DCON discussion material X-BeenThere: dcon@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Conferencing BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 16:13:15 -0000 On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Simon Pietro Romano wr= ote: > Hi all, > > following the recent discussions about Distributed Conferencing (for whic= h, > as you might know, a BOF at IETF 82 has been proposed), According to this http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki it has been approved. Regards Marshall I'm sending you > three references to Internet Drafts we submitted some time ago and which > should help position the proposed idea in the context of what has already > been achieved within the IETF (XCON in particular). These I-Ds clearly > represent just preliminary thoughts, which might be completely re-designe= d > should the IETF decide to start working on this topic, but they nonethele= ss > stand there as a first attempt at addressing the issues we identified so > far. Here are the documents I'm referring to: > > 1. Requirements for Distributed Conferencing --> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-requirements-09 > 2. A Framework for Distributed Conferencing --> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-framework-09 > 3. =A0Requirements for the XCON-DCON Synchronization Protocol --> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-xdsp-reqs-09 > > I hope this can help foster discussion on the brand new non-WG list that = has > been recently created. I'm CC:ing DISPATCH, since this is where the DCON > story comes from. > > Cheers, > > Simon > > -- > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0_\\|//_ > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0( O-O ) > =A0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o00~~(_)~~00o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Simon Pietro Romano > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Universita' di Napoli Federico II > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Computer Science Department > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Phone: +39 081 7683823 -- Fax: +39 081 7684219 > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0e-mail: spromano@unina.it > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0http://www.comics.unina.it/simonpietro.romano > > =A0 =A0< =A0 idioti. Ci rifletto un istante; e mi scoraggio>>. Magritte. > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 oooO > =A0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( =A0 )~~ Oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0\ ( =A0 =A0( =A0 ) > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 \_) =A0 =A0) / > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (_/ > > > _______________________________________________ > dcon mailing list > dcon@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcon > From spromano@unina.it Tue Oct 11 06:37:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dcon@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dcon@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EBBB21F8BF7; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 06:37:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DSWxAPjo2F-M; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 06:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.unina.it (smtp1.unina.it [192.132.34.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 037DF21F8BEF; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 06:37:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [143.225.229.230] ([143.225.229.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.unina.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9BDanbp003334 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:36:50 +0200 Message-ID: <4E94466F.8060905@unina.it> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:36:47 +0200 From: Simon Pietro Romano User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; it; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110920 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dcon@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------040609010807020909040702" Cc: DISPATCH Subject: [dcon] Updated BOF description for DCON X-BeenThere: dcon@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Distributed Conferencing BOF discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:37:02 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040609010807020909040702 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dear all, please find attached an updated description of the DCON BOF. We think it is important to define the scope very well so that what we include in the charter of a potential WG can be realistically done. So, we encourage you all to devote some time to discuss scope-related issues. Thanks, Simon -- _\\|//_ ( O-O ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o00~~(_)~~00o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Simon Pietro Romano Universita' di Napoli Federico II Computer Science Department Phone: +39 081 7683823 -- Fax: +39 081 7684219 e-mail: spromano@unina.it http://www.comics.unina.it/simonpietro.romano <>. Magritte. oooO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( )~~ Oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ --------------040609010807020909040702 Content-Type: text/plain; name="DCON-BOF-Description.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="DCON-BOF-Description.txt" DCON BOF co-chairs: Brian Rosen (br@brianrosen.net) Simon Pietro Romano (spromano@unina.it) DCON charter proposal: - Decription of Working Group The focus of this Working Group is to develop a standard solution for sca= lable conferencing over the Internet. The WG will define a standard suite= of protocols for distributed conferencing and will draw inspiration from= the work carried out in the XCON working group, which has defined a comp= lete architecture for centralized conferencing. DCON is based on the ide= a that a distributed conference can be setup by appropriately orchestrating the op= eration of a number of XCON focus elements, each in charge of managing a = certain number of participants. Interaction between each participant and = the corresponding conference focus will be entirely based on the standard= XCON framework, whereas inter-focus interaction will be defined by this = WG. In the DCON architecture a number of entities are used to manage conferen= ce setup in the presence of clients which are distributed across a geogra= phical network. Each managing entity plays the role of a conference focus as de= fined in the XCON working group documents. Indeed, each XCON focus will b= e in charge of managing a certain number of clients falling under its own= "realm". In order to move the XCON scope towards a distributed environm= ent, we will introduce inter-focus coordination, which is needed to effec= tively setup and manage conference instantiation and coordination. As in= the centralized case, we will define logical entities and naming conv= entions. An appropriate data model for distributed conferencing will be = potentially defined and will extend, when needed, the XCON data model. F= urthermore, we will propose the adoption of a suitable set of protocols w= hich are complementary to the call signaling protocols and are needed to = support advanced conferencing applications. The WG will basically need to introduce two major functions: (i) a coordi= nation level among conference focus entities; (ii) a way to effectively d= istribute conference state information. As to the first point above, the= coordination level is needed in order to manage a distributed conference= along its entire life-cycle. For instance, once a user decides to create= a new conference, the corresponding conference focus has to distribute c= onference information to all other foci, in such a way as to enable other= potential participants to retrieve the needed data and possibly subscrib= e to the event. The WG will make the assumption that all the operations n= eeded inside a single conference island are managed via the protocols a= nd interfaces defined inside the XCON working group. Hence, each single = island will keep on being based on a star-topology graph for all what con= cerns the call signaling part. The various available stars will then be c= onnected through an upper-layer topology providing inter-focus communicat= ion. The overall topology of the distributed conferencing scenario will = look like an overlay network of focus entities, each managing an underlyi= ng "centralized" conferencing island. The WG will envisage the possibilit= y to exploit extended Instant Messaging (IM) protocols (e.g. XMPP) for in= ter-focus communication. As to the second point mentioned above, it looks clear that a way to prop= agate information about conferences is needed when switching the view fro= m a centralized to a distributed perspective. Indeed, whenever a new con= ference is created (or an active conference changes its state) such an ev= ent has to be communicated to all interested (or active) participants. G= iven the intrinsic nature of the distributed framework (which actually ex= pands the centralized one through the introduction of an overlay network = of focus entities), the actual flow of information will always foresee = the interaction among conference focus entities for both conference infor= mation exchanging and state changes notifications. The same obviously ap= plies also to the involved natively centralized protocols defined in the = XCON framework. A suitable mechanism will be defined by the WG, allowing= for the dispatching of such centralized messages across the DCON network= =2E The mechanism in question must be fully compliant with the existing o= peration of XCON islands, which must keep their local participants tota= lly unaware of the potential distributed nature of conferences. Conferenc= e state propagation will take place in a number of alternative ways. For= instance, each focus might flood the received information across an inte= r-focus communication mesh, thus guaranteeing that potential participants= belonging to heterogeneous islands can be reached. In such case, focus = entities are "stateful", i.e. each of them stores information about curre= nt sessions and forwards such information to all peering entities in orde= r to get them up-to-date with respect to available conference sessions.=20 On the other hand, a distributed repository might be employed for the sak= e of storing conference information. Focus entities would access such re= pository, both to publish (either upon creation of a new conference, or t= o notify a change in the state of an active conference) and to retrieve i= nformation about active conferences (e.g. when a new participant wants to= access the list of ongoing/scheduled conference sessions he might be int= erested to join). In this last case, focus entities are "stateless". Fin= ally, the WG will evaluate the benefits deriving from the adoption of a p= ure peer-to-peer approach for the purpose of conference state information= spreading. The deliverables for the group will be: - A Framework for Distributed Conferencing (backward-compatible with XCON= in the single-island case) - A survey of potential solutions to the construction and maintainance of= a DCON conference repository (stateless, stateful, based on flooding, p2= p, etc.) - Requirements for an XCON-DCON Synchronization Protocol (XDSP) - Specification of the XDSP - DCON call-flows draft (involving the use of XDSP) - Goals and Milestones February 2012 --> Submit Framework document for publication as PS April 2012 --> Submit XDSP Requirements document for publication as Infor= mational June 2012 --> Submit survey of solutions for the DCON conference reposito= ry for publication as Informational September 2012 --> Submit XDSP Specification document for publication as = PS January 2013 --> Submit DCON call flows draft for publication as Informat= ional Current drafts related to such proposal: 1. Requirements for Distributed Conferencing --> http://tools.ietf.org/ht= ml/draft-romano-dcon-requirements-09 2. A Framework for Distributed Conferencing --> http://tools.ietf.org/htm= l/draft-romano-dcon-framework-09 3. Requirements for the XCON-DCON Synchronization Protocol --> http://to= ols.ietf.org/html/draft-romano-dcon-xdsp-reqs-09=20 --------------040609010807020909040702--