Subject: [SPIRITS] IETF47 SPIRITS meeting notes (draft V.1)

From: Alec Brusilovsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 20:17:08 -0500

All,

Please find attached draft meeting notes from our meeting in Adelaide.
Special thanks to Goutam Shaw for taking them, while contributing to the
meeting.
Steve and I need to send them off to the IETF by the end of the week, so
send your comments before that.

Regards,
Alec

*********************************

47th IETF SPIRITS Working Group Meeting Notes

Reported by Alec Brusilovsky.
Recorded by Goutam Shaw, to whom both co-chairs express their deepest
appreciation for the job well done.

SPIRITS WG met on the afternoon of Monday, March 27, 2000.
There were 103 registered attendees.

Chairs: Steve Bellovin, Alec Brusilovsky

Agenda:

1. Agenda bashing - 5 minutes.

2. Pre-SPIRITS implementations with focus on architecture
    a. Telia/Nortel  - 5 minutes.
    b. Korea Telecom - 5 minutes.
    c. NEC Corporation - 5 minutes.
    d. Lucent - Igor Faynberg - 5 minutes.

3. Progress of Implementation Document - Hui-Lan Lu - 5 minutes.

4. SPIRITS progress in ITU-T - Hui-Lan Lu - 5 minutes.

5. EURESCOM P909 findings relative to SPIRITS WG objectives - Gianni
Canal - 5 minutes.

6. What are SPIRITS architectural components? Do we know all of them?
What other
components SPIRITS needs? - Discussion on Architecture - 45 minutes. Lev
Slutsman starts it
off with a brief introduction.

7. SPIRITS Protocol requirements - protocol discussion - 25 minutes.

Alec Brusilovsky presented agenda and asked for suggestions or agenda
comments.

1. Agenda Bashing
Agenda accepted.

2. Pre-SPIRITS implementations:
 a. Nortel-Telia Service Gateway
 (draft-nyckelgard-spirits-pre-impl-01.txt)
 No questions or issues raised

 b. Korea Telecom ICW
 (draft-rhim-spirits-kticw-00.txt)
 Issue: limited support for mobility, static calling number

 c. NEC implementation of ICW
 (draft-ago-spirits-icw-00.txt)
 Issue: Q.1228 extensions used are: User-client identification process.
Extended CS2
 parameter.

 d. Lucent Implementation of OCC
 (draft-ietf-spirits-lucentocc-00.txt)
 Issue: Firewall between the PSTN and the IP network is in reality
there, but is not
 shown on the diagram.

Summary: three pre-SPIRITS implementations utilizing SIP and one -
proprietary one, TCP/IP based.

3. Status of Informational RFC

All the internet drafts published.
Next is to compile the base material
- Introduction : compile the existing services
- Services - services description
- End of April for initial draft RFC commitment

Summary: all the internet drafts are published, next step is to compile
the base material, first draft of the RFC to be published on the mailing
list by the end of April.

4. ITU-T related issues: an update

- ITU-T recommendation Q.1231 lists PINT related IN services. Also
Q.1241 describes Q.1241
- INAP extensions are slated for IN CS-4
- SG 13 has determined an IP framework and PINT architecture
- New drafted questions are IP telephony and PINT/SPIRITS related
services
- Excerpts from SG11 docs. Can be brought into IETF
- Q.1224 is still a gray area as far as liasoning into IETF is
concerned.

5. EURESCOM P909 findings relative to SPIRITS WG objectives
(draft-canal-p909-pint-spirits-00.txt)

- EURESCOM P909 overview
- P909 example services overview
- P909 architecture and requirements overview

Issue: PARLAY Gateway is in the diagram. It is there because API
oriented approach was
adopted P909 from the beginning. PARLEY represents just one example of
implementation. The
goal of this report and the I-D is to collect and offer services
requirements to IETF
SPIRITS (and PINT).

Issue: P909 architecture is available to the public and Gianni Canal
will publish it on the
SPIRITS mailing list.

6. SPIRITS Architectural components and protocol discussion
(draft-lslutsman-spirits-interfaces-00.txt)

Issue: SPIRITS protocol is between SPIRITS client and server. Remove
CORBA from the diagram (it is not in the I-D)

Issue: SIP with possible extensions can be used as SPIRITS protocol.
There is a need for the
SPIRITS protocol requirements.

Issue: SPIRITS client cannot be classified as SCP. Remove SCP wording
from the diagram.

Issue: C interface is for registration and notification

Issue: It is possible to introduce SPIRITS client as a gateway rather
than an SCP ala Telia
architecture.

Issue: Entities B and C both can be PINT protocol. A and B both should
be doubled headed.

Issue: Do the Requirements Document To capture the business practices.

Issue: Two very important protocol requirements: interwork with INAP and
PINT. Not everything in INAP is required, just enough to interwork with
it.

Issue: Requirements RFC will be good starting point. Need to extend
milestones part of
SPIRITS Charter to include Protocol Requirements RFC. Volunteers for
editorship were asked
to talk to the WG chairs after the meeting. Igor Faynberg volunteered to
write the detail on
protocol requirements.

Issue: Include in the RFC suggestions what kind of messages need to flow
between entities.

Summary: definite need for the Requirements Document, interworking with
INAP and PINT are some of the requirements, chairs called for
volunteers, Requirements RFC to be added to the SPIRITS WG milestones
list.

Meeting adjourned

Respectfully submitted,
Steve and Alec