From rjsparks@nostrum.com Fri Nov 9 11:03:42 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96EF521F8475 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:03:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cRexarLfEUci for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:03:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2850C21F8471 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 11:03:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-6421.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-6421.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.100.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qA9J3fgG050699 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:03:41 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) Message-ID: <509D538F.5000406@nostrum.com> Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:03:43 -0500 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: atoca@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 130.129.100.33 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Subject: [atoca] Closing the ATOCA working group X-BeenThere: atoca@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion list for the IETF Authority-to-Citizen Alert \(atoca\) working group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:03:42 -0000 All - Based on the discussion at the last two ATOCA meetings, we are closing the working group. Martin took the action of sending a summary of the discussion and the current state to inform any future efforts. This list will remain open. RjS From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Tue Nov 13 14:04:32 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5F821F86AE; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:04:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.545 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.545 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ksbwP57D8IDK; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:04:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9A5421F86A3; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:04:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IESG Secretary To: IETF Announcement List X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.36 Message-ID: <20121113220431.14635.86376.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:04:31 -0800 Cc: atoca@ietf.org Subject: [atoca] WG Action: Conclusion of Authority-to-Citizen Alert (atoca) X-BeenThere: atoca@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion list for the IETF Authority-to-Citizen Alert \(atoca\) working group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:04:32 -0000 The Authority-to-Citizen Alert (atoca) in the Real-Time Applications and In= frastructure Area has concluded. The IESG contact person is Robert Sparks. The mailing list will remain active. From martin.thomson@gmail.com Tue Nov 13 15:20:32 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19BF421F8518 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.85 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.85 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.252, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VCFBLU9aOC5Y for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BAA021F84D5 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f172.google.com with SMTP id y2so2857314lbk.31 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=FDB0b7dL+KQEyjbb3WB5i+f9sA82fZxkIqHwgauyLkM=; b=OaiDC1Cer96mdo1vfauMruyRM2bQXh9Jbv2FRPoS9R2OTPuq5JyYThsFfTRs1AQEXm G0/YeSX/bh0fxk9xowX+h6D8uoGC8KRsyI35jrYmK/z7bNkCjOeS/27lRf7aOQiTq0IN LZX/jlgzf4EvtesdoifKTn1uKKrC0m6Xek+Y+VaYKAzMzKgUsS4w324mtEOdd3TBq1MJ +sI86mZff+EFTt1MmoRlVUuBFsKs/UaMGm9vervsdVvHnMq1bE4dQwi7U9PynnVq8QEi JlomZjv4ePdg2JPsrrfghWZFMAlcWtsmvUy1CdOi3xXsGZKLsefdf49NKsh0gmzfFBnT v5rQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.39.105 with SMTP id o9mr6316482lbk.123.1352848829942; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.83.2 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:20:29 -0800 Message-ID: From: Martin Thomson To: atoca@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e0cb4efe2d7ef18bc104ce68a94b Subject: [atoca] ATOCA status at time of closing X-BeenThere: atoca@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion list for the IETF Authority-to-Citizen Alert \(atoca\) working group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 23:20:32 -0000 --e0cb4efe2d7ef18bc104ce68a94b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 In addition to reaching rough consensus on closing the group, the working group also concluded that it is important to record, for posterity, what course was followed to reach this point. The working group initially performed some exploration of the problem space as part of a requirements analysis process. The history of draf-ietf-atoca-requirements reveals some of the conclusions that were made during this process. Broadly speaking the following problems were identified: - point-to-point delivery of alerts publish/subscribe architectures were considered likely solutions; a candidate solution was proposed for SIP (draft-rosen-atoca-sip-cap); XMPP (XEP-0127) was also identified - point-to-multipoint delivery of alerts draft-barnes-atoca-delivery was proposed for this purpose - secure identification of alert originators a candidate solution was proposed for the alert envelope (draft-barnes-atoca-escape) - discovery of (or delegation of identification for) trusted alert originators - discovery of alert distribution channels these were not considered necessary for some classes of alerting draft-barnes-atoca-meta was proposed to address both aspects of discovery The work in the group concluded primarily due to a lack of engagement. It was not clear that there was sufficiently widespread support for the work that the group was conducting. The small number of technical contributions did not attract adequate feedback or implementation. During the course of the work it became apparent that there are some problems here that could benefit from the expertise that is available in the IETF. However, with the problem so loosely scoped, this group was considered unlikely to achieve consensus behind a solution at the present. --e0cb4efe2d7ef18bc104ce68a94b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In addition to reaching rough consensus on closing the group, the working g= roup also concluded that it is important to record, for posterity, what cou= rse was followed to reach this point.

The working group initially pe= rformed some exploration of the problem space as part of a requirements ana= lysis process.=C2=A0 The history of draf-ietf-atoca-requirements reveals so= me of the conclusions that were made during this process.

Broadly speaking the following problems were identified:

=C2=A0-= point-to-point delivery of alerts
=C2=A0=C2=A0 publish/subscribe archit= ectures were considered likely solutions; a candidate solution was proposed= for SIP (draft-rosen-atoca-sip-cap); XMPP (XEP-0127) was also identified
=C2=A0- point-to-multipoint delivery of alerts
=C2=A0=C2=A0 draft-ba= rnes-atoca-delivery was proposed for this purpose

=C2=A0- secure ide= ntification of alert originators
=C2=A0=C2=A0 a candidate solution was p= roposed for the alert envelope (draft-barnes-atoca-escape)

=C2=A0- discovery of (or delegation of identification for) trusted aler= t originators
=C2=A0- discovery of alert distribution channels
=C2=A0= =C2=A0 these were not considered necessary for some classes of alerting
= =C2=A0=C2=A0 draft-barnes-atoca-meta was proposed to address both aspects o= f discovery

The work in the group concluded primarily due to a lack of engagement.= =C2=A0 It was not clear that there was sufficiently widespread support for = the work that the group was conducting.=C2=A0 The small number of technical= contributions did not attract adequate feedback or implementation.

During the course of the work it became apparent that there are some pr= oblems here that could benefit from the expertise that is available in the = IETF.=C2=A0 However, with the problem so loosely scoped, this group was con= sidered unlikely to achieve consensus behind a solution at the present.
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0


--e0cb4efe2d7ef18bc104ce68a94b--