From extest-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Fri Dec 1 06:13:46 2000 Received: from lists.bell-labs.com (share.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.58]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id GAA14999 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 06:13:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from share.research.bell-labs.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51CD344636 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 05:04:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: lists.bell-labs.com mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@lists.bell-labs.com To: spirits-archive@ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes X-Ack: no Sender: extest-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Errors-To: extest-admin@lists.bell-labs.com X-BeenThere: extest@lists.bell-labs.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6 Precedence: bulk Message-Id: <20001201100432.51CD344636@lists.bell-labs.com> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 05:04:32 -0500 (EST) This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your lists.bell-labs.com mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, spirits-request@lists.bell-labs.com) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@lists.bell-labs.com. Thanks! Passwords for spirits-archive@lists.ietf.org: List Password // URL ---- -------- spirits@lists.bell-labs.com QMKP http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/options/spirits/spirits-archive%40lists.ietf.org From spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Fri Dec 1 10:41:28 2000 Received: from lists.bell-labs.com (share.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.58]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA22341 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:41:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from share.research.bell-labs.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5706744454; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 09:40:02 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Received: from rsys000a.roke.co.uk (unknown [193.118.201.102]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC1E64444D for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 09:39:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from rsys002a.roke.co.uk - 193.118.192.251 by rsys000a.roke.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1774.114.11); Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:39:39 +0000 Received: from [193.118.192.55] (babylon.roke.co.uk [193.118.192.55]) by rsys002a.roke.co.uk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id X88KNXS4; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:39:34 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: lwc@193.118.192.24 Message-Id: To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com From: Lawrence Conroy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Subject: [SPIRITS] Archie II Sender: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Errors-To: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com X-BeenThere: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: IETF SPIRITS Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: http://lists.bell-labs.com/pipermail/spirits/ Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:40:13 +0000 Hi Y'all, Apologies for inflicting an ugly diagram on the group yesterday. "Upon further consideration", here is the same thing, drawn better, IMHO. Please note that I *ASSUME* the entity that is called a "SPIRITS Proxy" in the current architecture draft but is in fact an Application Layer Gateway (A.L.G. in the first figures) between the User Interface and the SPIRITS User Agent Server is: (i) optional - after all, its possible to have a SPIRITS User Agent Server with its own User Interface running on the end user's machine, and (ii) connected to the User Interface via Interface B (if I understand the architecture draft correctly). In the main diagram, the entity I have called a SRIRITS Registrar/Proxy is akin to the PINT (or SIP) Proxy/Registrar described in RFC2848 and RFC2543. Note that the protocol is the same on either side of this entity. I have to say that this was my understanding of the architecture from my first presentation in Minneapolis in March '99; we seem to have been agreeing all along but the diagram doesn't quite get around to changing. Let's do it now! Hope this helps. --------------------------------------- Figure 1a Optional PINT User Interface .----. |PRUI|--- |____| \ <- Interface Z \ \--------. |PINT RUI| | A.L.G. | ========== ========== | PINT | | Client | \________/ ! Interface A -> ! ! Figure 1a Optional PINT Request User Interface Key: PRUI = PINT Request User Interface Used to provide user interface by which customer can specify PINT request. Can also be used to carry notifications on status of PINT request. Example - PRUI is a Web Browser, Interface Z carries HTTP, PRUI ALG is a Web Server with an "internal" interface to a PINT Client. .----. ---|SCUI| Interface B -> / |____| / .-----------/ |SPIRITS CUI| | A.L.G. | ============= ============= | SPIRITS | | Server | \___________/ ! Interface C -> ! ! Figure 1b Optional SPIRITS Choice User Interface Key: SCUI = SPIRITS Choice User Interface Used to provide user interface by which choices can be elicited from customer and can be returned to the SPIRITS Server. Can also be used to carry indications of initial SPIRITS requests. Example - SCUI is an X-Windows server, Interface B carries X-RPC, SCUI ALG is an X-Client program with an "internal" interface to a SPIRITS Server. .----------. .----------. | PINT | | SPIRITS | |User Agent| |User Agent| | Client | | Server | \__________/ \__________/ ! ! ! Interface C -> ! Interface A -> ! ! ! ! ........... ............ .> : PINT : . SPIRITS . <. . :Registrar: . Registrar. . . : /Proxy : . /Proxy . . . .:.........: ............. . ! ! ! Interface C -> ! Interface A -> ! ! ! ! .----------. .----------. | PINT | | SPIRITS | |User Agent| IP Network |User Agent| .+.+.+.+.| Server |.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+. | Client |.+.+.+.+. | (PINT) | GSTN |(SPIRITS) | |(Gateway) | |(Gateway) | \__________/ \__________/ ! ! ! ! .---------- -----------. [ ] [ eXecutive Initiative ] [ System System ] [ ] \__________ ___________/ | | / \ / <-------- Line ------------> \ | | O-O O-O - <- Telephone -> - / \ / \ ----- ----- Figure 2 - PINT / SPIRITS Architecture Notes: (i) The PINT and SPIRITS Registrar/Proxies are optional; however, they are very likely to exist in "real world" configurations. PINT Servers are would be expected to register their ability to provide service with a PINT Registrar whilst the SPIRITS Servers would be expected to register their capability with a SPIRITS Registrar. Subsequent requests would be directed by a chain of PINT or SPIRITS proxies, taking into account these prior registrations. (ii) In the PINT case, the executive system is unspecified by RFC2848, but the reference example system is one based on I.N. principles, consisting of SCF and SSF; in some PINT services this could also include SDF and SRF elements. In SPIRITS case, the Initiative System is specified to be one that maintains a call state model similar to that defined in I.2104/1214/1224. The reference example system is assumed to an I.N.-based system consisting of SCF and SSF entities, potentially with SDF and SRF elements. -- All the best, Lawrence ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | Lawrence Conroy, | "These Opinions must be mine, 'cos if they | | Roke Manor Research | were my Company's they'd pay me for them" | |- lwc@roke.co.uk ---+- Tel: +44 1794 833666 Fax: +44 1794 833434 --| _______________________________________________ SPIRITS mailing list SPIRITS@lists.bell-labs.com http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/spirits From spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Fri Dec 1 16:20:16 2000 Received: from lists.bell-labs.com (share.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.58]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA25518 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:20:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from share.research.bell-labs.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D46324446D; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:58:00 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@share.research.bell-labs.com Received: from crufty.research.bell-labs.com (crufty.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.49]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D5C5244455 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:57:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists.bell-labs.com ([135.104.27.211]) by crufty; Fri Dec 1 15:54:22 EST 2000 Received: by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) id D147544380; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:42:05 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Received: from ans.ih.lucent.com (ans.ih.lucent.com [135.2.78.5]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 83EA34437D for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:42:05 -0500 (EST) Received: by ans.ih.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.5 sol2) id OAA11733; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:42:00 -0600 Cc: Steve Bellovin Received: from lucent.com by ans.ih.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.5 sol2) id OAA11730; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:41:59 -0600 Message-ID: <3A280D4B.39AE9758@lucent.com> From: Alec Brusilovsky X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ru,uk MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SPIRITS list Original-CC: Steve Bellovin Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------64444C66653FC32E7AFD35D8" Subject: [SPIRITS] San Diego Meeting Agenda Sender: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Errors-To: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com X-BeenThere: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: IETF SPIRITS Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: http://lists.bell-labs.com/pipermail/spirits/ Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:42:51 -0600 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------64444C66653FC32E7AFD35D8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: TUESDAY, December 12, 2000 Time: 14:15-15:15. 1. Agenda bashing and goals of the session - 5 minutes; 2. SPIRITS progress in ITU-T - Hui-Lan Lu - 5 minutes; 3. Discussion on the additions to the SPIRITS Architecture Document - 5 minutes; 4. Discussion on the SPIRITS Protocol Requirements - 20 minutes; 5. Next step - SPIRITS Protocol - 20 minutes; 6. Wrap-up - 5 minutes. See you there, Steve and Alec --------------64444C66653FC32E7AFD35D8 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="abrusilovsky.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Alec Brusilovsky Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="abrusilovsky.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin:vcard n:Brusilovsky;Alec tel;fax:+1 630 713 5840 tel;work:+1 630 713 8401 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:e-Services Group;Next Generation Evolution and Architecture version:2.1 email;internet:abrusilovsky@lucent.com title:MTS adr;quoted-printable:;;IHP 1A-423=0D=0A263 Shuman Blvd,P O Box 3050;Naperville;IL;60566-7050;U S x-mozilla-cpt:;5312 fn:Alec Brusilovsky end:vcard --------------64444C66653FC32E7AFD35D8-- _______________________________________________ SPIRITS mailing list SPIRITS@lists.bell-labs.com http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/spirits From spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Thu Dec 7 10:36:53 2000 Received: from lists.bell-labs.com (share.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.58]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA04528 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 10:36:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from share.research.bell-labs.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A6244357; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:37:01 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@share.research.bell-labs.com Received: from crufty.research.bell-labs.com (crufty.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.49]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F5CC4434E for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 18:09:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists.bell-labs.com ([135.104.27.211]) by crufty; Wed Dec 6 19:06:47 EST 2000 Received: by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) id EE0DD44384; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 18:54:32 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Received: from hotair.hobl.lucent.com (hotair.hobl.lucent.com [199.118.135.2]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B314A4437D; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 18:54:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from bell-labs.com by hotair.hobl.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.5 sol2) id SAA21143; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 18:54:31 -0500 Message-ID: <3A2ED1B3.112387E4@bell-labs.com> From: Igor Faynberg Reply-To: faynberg@lucent.com Organization: Lucent Technologies X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en]C-CCK-MCD EMS-1.4 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pint@lists.bell-labs.com, spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [SPIRITS] [Fwd: [PINT] Protocol Action: Management Information Base for the PINTServices Architecture to Proposed Standard] Sender: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Errors-To: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com X-BeenThere: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: IETF SPIRITS Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: http://lists.bell-labs.com/pipermail/spirits/ Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 18:54:27 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Steve and I invite all PINTers to congratulate and thank Murali Krishnaswamy and Dan Romascanu on the completion of this work, which concludes the present PINT charter. (Yes! What a milestone!) Dan the MIB Doctor, has worked especially hard on several last revisions that went through the IESG scrutiny. Thanks also go to Bert Wijnen, OA&M Director, for sharpening his knife (I ment to say "compiler") and running it through each new draft version, the operation followed by his incisive, constructive comments. We hope Dan and Murali will help us in SPIRITS, when it comes to the next MIB. Igor and Steve The IESG wrote: > > The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'Management Information Base > for the PINT Services Architecture' as a > Proposed Standard. This document is the product of the PSTN and > Internet Internetworking Working Group. The IESG contact persons are > Allison Mankin and Scott Bradner. > > > Technical Summary > > PINT services are an emerging set of new Internet based applications > where voice (and fax) requests to the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone > Network) are carried over the Internet. The PINT services are defined > in RFC 2848. > > This document defines a MIB which contains the elements for > monitoring the performance of a PINT based service. The MIB consists > of details of the four basic PINT services and their performance > statistics measured under various criteria. > > Working Group Summary > > The proposed MIB was supported by the working group and no issues > came up during IETF last-call. > > Protocol Quality > > This document was reviewed by Scott Bradner for the IESG. > > Note to RFC Editor: > > Please merge the REVISION clauses on page 5/6 into one revision code as follows: > > OLD: > DESCRIPTION > "Revised version - editorial and MIB corrections > following Area Director Review" > REVISION "200009061900Z" > DESCRIPTION > "Revised version - editorial and MIB corrections" > REVISION "200009061900Z" > DESCRIPTION > "This MIB defines the objects necessary to monitor > > Krishnaswamy, Romascanu [Page 6] > > Internet Draft PINT MIB November 2000 > > PINT Services" > REVISION "200007241525Z" > DESCRIPTION > "Initial version, published as RFC xxxx." > ::= { mib-2 xxxx } -- To be assigned by IANA > > NEW: > DESCRIPTION > "This MIB defines the objects necessary to monitor > PINT Services" > > -- Revision history > > REVISION "200xmmdd0000Z" -- Same date as LAST-UPDATED > -- i.e. date that RFC gets published > DESCRIPTION > "Initial version, published as RFC xxxx." > > Krishnaswamy, Romascanu [Page 6] > > Internet Draft PINT MIB November 2000 > > ::= { mib-2 xxxx } -- To be assigned by IANA > > _______________________________________________ > PINT mailing list > PINT@lists.bell-labs.com > http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/pint _______________________________________________ SPIRITS mailing list SPIRITS@lists.bell-labs.com http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/spirits From spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Thu Dec 7 10:37:07 2000 Received: from lists.bell-labs.com (share.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.58]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA04569 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 10:37:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from share.research.bell-labs.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA6C44391; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:37:03 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@share.research.bell-labs.com Received: from crufty.research.bell-labs.com (crufty.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.49]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DAB4C4433F for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 20:19:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists.bell-labs.com ([135.104.27.211]) by crufty; Wed Dec 6 21:16:06 EST 2000 Received: by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) id 7949444380; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 21:03:50 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Received: from hotair.hobl.lucent.com (hotair.hobl.lucent.com [199.118.135.2]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 487CE4437D for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 21:03:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from bell-labs.com by hotair.hobl.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.5 sol2) id VAA26927; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 21:03:50 -0500 Message-ID: <3A2EF002.80A2CBDF@bell-labs.com> From: Igor Faynberg Reply-To: faynberg@lucent.com Organization: Lucent Technologies X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en]C-CCK-MCD EMS-1.4 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Cc: faynberg@lucent.com Subject: Re: [SPIRITS] Archie References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Errors-To: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com X-BeenThere: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: IETF SPIRITS Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: http://lists.bell-labs.com/pipermail/spirits/ Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 21:03:46 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit First, thanks to Lawrence for submitting the drawing! If it comes for replacing the one made by Lev for the Architecture documents, I see a few minor-to-medium problems (like jibing the terminology with what is presently in the text), which I believe can be worked out, and one major problem. While in PINT we had decided (and I agreed to that decision and still stand by it!) that there is a need for a gateway and no-man interface between the Internet and PSTN, in SPIRITS we have decided that the SPIRITS client is located in the PSTN. (The extensive discussion took place at the Washington meeting, and the subseqent agreement made later firmly.) This is really the only thing that makes the present architecture not so symmetric, and this is why it would be impossible to reconcile the two drawings as they stand now. For the protocol work, it does not matter much whether the connection is over the gateway or not, but having an extra interface had caused some problem in understanding PINT. As we produce the Informational Architecture RFC for SPIRITS (which we had not done in the case of PINT), we have a chance to make things clear. Beyond the pedagogical argument, it is simply incomprehensible how an IN-supported service originating in the PSTN ends up on the "SPIRITS client gateway." I talked to Lev briefly to clarify a few things that made him make a decision and to refresh the history. Even though this has been a clear decision, I think it is not a bad idea to revisit it during the meeting. It is a very straight-forward thing, so I don't expect much disagreement or much time spent on the subject. And--back to Jim Buller's earlier question (a very good one!) on splitting PINT and SPIRITS. Prior to talking to Soren in September, I saw no need for this, but his requirement that the IN be used ONLY to initiate the service is something that we must respect. I am still expecting some text for that in the overall requirements, and I intend to state that while the joint PINT/SPIRITS package is needed for many important services, it is NOT a necessary requirement. In other words, a one-message NOTIFY thing is an acceptable solution for a (rather small) SPIRITS implementation. I doubt I will be able to talk much on the list before the meeting... My day job has been rather overwhelming lately. But I am looking forward to meet you all in San Diego and continue in a good spirit of cooperation. And lots of spirits drinking after the SPIRITS meeting! With best regards, Igor Lawrence Conroy wrote: > > Hi folks, > This list does not allow .PDF to be included, so herewith: > > ............. ................ > . A.N.Other . .Separate End . > . Client . .User Interface. > .(e.g. Web . ................ > . Browser) . . > ............. . > . . > Protocol A Protocol B > . . > :...........: :.............: > : ALG : : ALG : > : e.g. Web : : e.g.Protocol: > : Server : : Y Client : > ........... ............. > ----------- ------------- > !PINT Client! ! SPIRITS ! > !-----------! ! Server ! > ! !-------------! > PINT Service ! > Protocol SPIRITS Protocol > ! ! > ............. ............... > : optional : : optional : > : PINT Proxy: :SPIRITS Proxy: > : /Registrar: : /Registrar : > :...........: :.............: > ! ! > PSP SPIRITS Protocol > ! ! > !-----------! !--------------! > !PINT Server! !SPIRITS Client! PSTN- > \/! (Gateway) !\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\! (Gateway) !\/\/\/ Internet > ! ! ! ! Boundary > !-----------! !--------------! > ? ? > Some Protocol Some other Protocol > _____?_____ ______?_______ > : Executive : : Initiative : > : System : : System : > :e.g. SSF, : :e.g. SSF, SCF : > :SCF, etc. : : etc. : > :-----------: :--------------: > | | > | | > 0---0 GSTN Handset 0---0 > / \ or MS/UE / \ > ----- ----- > > Note: Protocol A might be used if user interface for PINT service requests > is (for example) a Web form. This would be submitted to a Web Server that > used an internal PINT Client to initiate a PINT Service request. It is not > required (for example, a program could "talk" PSP directly). > > Protocol B is fairly similar; it MAY be used between an end User Interface > and an Application Layer Gateway that included both a SPIRITS Server and > an end node for this other program. It is not required; the SPIRITS Server > may execute the requested service directly (with any needed end User > Interface). > > Regards, Lawrence > > _______________________________________________ > SPIRITS mailing list > SPIRITS@lists.bell-labs.com > http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/spirits _______________________________________________ SPIRITS mailing list SPIRITS@lists.bell-labs.com http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/spirits From spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Fri Dec 29 13:59:52 2000 Received: from lists.bell-labs.com (share.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.58]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA11610 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:59:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from share.research.bell-labs.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 501C74434F; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:00:02 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@share.research.bell-labs.com Received: from crufty.research.bell-labs.com (crufty.research.bell-labs.com [204.178.16.49]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A71F4434C for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 12:59:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists.bell-labs.com ([135.104.27.211]) by crufty; Fri Dec 29 13:57:06 EST 2000 Received: by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) id DF81344380; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:45:04 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com Received: from ans.ih.lucent.com (ans.ih.lucent.com [135.2.78.5]) by lists.bell-labs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A17404437D for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:45:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by ans.ih.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.5 sol2) id MAA12410; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 12:45:01 -0600 Cc: Steve Bellovin Received: from lucent.com by ans.ih.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.5 sol2) id MAA12395; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 12:45:00 -0600 Message-ID: <3A4CDBF3.7DC2D90D@lucent.com> From: Alec Brusilovsky X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ru,uk MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SPIRITS list Original-CC: Steve Bellovin Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------AC18592024755D4FEEEB1931" Subject: [SPIRITS] San Diego meeting notes Sender: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com Errors-To: spirits-admin@lists.bell-labs.com X-BeenThere: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: spirits@lists.bell-labs.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: IETF SPIRITS Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: http://lists.bell-labs.com/pipermail/spirits/ Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 12:46:11 -0600 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------AC18592024755D4FEEEB1931 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Group, Please see attached San Diego meeting notes. We have to submit these notes to the proceedings by the end of the next week. Wishing all of you a very good spirited and Happy New Year! -Alec --------------AC18592024755D4FEEEB1931 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; name="IETF49-SPIRITS minutes.txt" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="IETF49-SPIRITS minutes.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 49th IETF SPIRITS Working Group Meeting Notes Reported by Alec Brusilovsky. Recorded by Kumar Vemuri, to whom both co-chairs express their deepest appreciation for the excellent job. SPIRITS WG met in the afternoon of Tuesday, December 12, 2000. There were 106 registered attendees. Chairs: Steve Bellovin, Alec Brusilovsky Agenda 1. Agenda bashing and goals of the session - 5 minutes; 2. SPIRITS progress in ITU-T - Hui-Lan Lu - 5 minutes; 3. Discussion on the additions to the SPIRITS Architecture Document - 5 minutes; 4. Discussion on the SPIRITS Protocol Requirements - 20 minutes - I. Faynberg; 5. Next step - SPIRITS Protocol - 20 minutes; 6. Wrap-up - 5 minutes. 1. Agenda bashing and goals of the session A question on PINT related issues. The chair requested this discussion to be taken to the PINT list. Agenda was accepted without changes. 2. SPIRITS progress in ITU-T - Hui-Lan Lu ITU IN Architecture and Requirements WG requested the most recent SPIRITS information. RFC 2995, The Spirits Architecture document, IN and PINT related Requirements for Spirits Protocol were shared with the ITU-T. The IN group in the ITU took this information from the Spirits architecture and included this in one of their draft recommendations. The drafting session in Geneva resulted in a Spirits example configuration in Q.1244. More discussions may take place in the next ITU IN WG meeting. 3. Discussion on the additions to the SPIRITS Architecture Document Alec B. talked about working on the protocol. There was consensus on the SPIRITS architecture at the last meeting, now we ought to start work on the protocol requirements. Alec asked for an open discussion of Spirits related architectural issues, based on items discussed on the Spirits mailing list. Issue: Comments on architectural framework. There's one interface between the PINT server and the PINT gateway. This interface was not addressed in detail. Some people suggested that that interface be made Corba based. The Spirits proxy in the modified architectural view becomes a gateway like entity on the domain interface, and that this does not impact the architectural diagram. Alec took the Hum for keeping existing architecture vs. redrawing architecture to reflect similarities or symmetries with PINT. The Hum for the former approach was louder. So the WG will be going forward with the existing architecture. The Architecture Document will be submitted to the IESG as a candidate for the Informational RFC. 4. Discussion on the SPIRITS Protocol Requirements - I.Faynberg Igor (de-facto Document Editor) talked about Spirits requirements. Igor summarized the changes to be made reflecting recent discussions. Igor suggested that the present document will be modified according to Sören's proposal to include the words that will specifically say that PINT implementation is not a requirement for a SPIRITS implementation. He also mentioned that there was much useful text in Lawrence's and Jim's drafts and asked that Sören, Jörgen, Lawrence, and Jim mail to him the pieces of their respective documents to be included in the requirements within the first couple weeks after the meeting. The speaker talked about using IN as a mechanism for transporting notifications. Some changes were made to the mention of CAMEL related issues in the document. Igor talked about DPs in the call model that would be "SPIRITS enabled", and about the need to pick the appropriate CS (CS-2 or CS-3?) for this as the base model. He then discussed the use of the SIP SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY mechanisms for SPIRITS. Issue: How one could use SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY methods when a protocol was not already selected. Answer: the method names as used are merely indicative of the capabilities supported, not that we are talking about protocol specifics at this time. Regarding persistent interactions, setting dynamic triggers etc., one may have to also use PINT building blocks to support SPIRITS end-to-end call flows. There is a possible problem in recursion: Changes in PINT impact SPIRITS and vice versa. We need PINT-related requirements in SPIRITS and vice-versa. Issue: It should be possible to implement SPIRITS without implementing PINT. Answer: We're not saying it is absolutely necessary, but we will also not discourage the use of PINT. Some requirements will continue to address the issue of what happens in SPIRITS, when we use PINT. Alec B.: During the previous SPIRITS WG meeting in Pittsburgh we agreed that it is not necessary to implement PINT in order to implement SPIRITS. Issue: JAIN/PARLAY and 3GPP APIs should interact easily with SPIRITS. Maybe we should look to these APIs while building a requirement set for SPIRITS. Chair: Since IETF does not have formal relationships with JAIN and PARLAY, this may not be possible in all cases. Both chairs asked for a Consensus Hum: Should we move on this (Requirements) document - is it ready to progress? Yes (based on the Hum). The Requirements Document will be shortly posted for a WG Last Call on the mailing list. 5. Next step - SPIRITS Protocol The Architecture and the Protocol Requirements work is pretty much done. We are coming closer and closer to the actual SPIRITS Protocol work. Chairs asked for the Protocol Proposals I-Ds to be submitted and for the volunteers for the Protocol Team to identify themselves. --------------AC18592024755D4FEEEB1931 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="abrusilovsky.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Alec Brusilovsky Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="abrusilovsky.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin:vcard n:Brusilovsky;Alec tel;fax:+1 630 713 5840 tel;work:+1 630 713 8401 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:e-Services Group;Next Generation Evolution and Architecture version:2.1 email;internet:abrusilovsky@lucent.com title:MTS adr;quoted-printable:;;IHP 1A-423=0D=0A263 Shuman Blvd,P O Box 3050;Naperville;IL;60566-7050;U S x-mozilla-cpt:;5312 fn:Alec Brusilovsky end:vcard --------------AC18592024755D4FEEEB1931-- _______________________________________________ SPIRITS mailing list SPIRITS@lists.bell-labs.com http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/spirits