Subject: [dispatch] Cutoff for charter proposals on Monday

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:12:55 +0300

Folks,

this is a reminder of our cutoff for charter proposals, which is on 
Monday (September 21st). Per our previous email: "A charter proposal 
must consist of a minimum of a problem statement and at least one 
milestone/deliverable. This deadline will allow time for consideration 
of proposals that could potentially be "dispatched" prior to the WG 
session."

A few of the topics we received arrived after the previous deadline, 
which was September 7th. We will be considering even those topics that 
arrived a bit late because we realize the deadline was quite tough to 
meet (specially for people that returned from their vacation right 
before the deadline).

We are expecting charter proposals for:

o Third-party authorization
o CBUS
o Session recording
o Identity
o Disaggregated media
o Domain registrations in SIP
o SIP - XMPP
o Alert-info URNs
o Reference to an earlier communication

Let the chairs know if there are topics missing from this list.

Thanks,

Gonzalo
DISPATCH co-chair

---

From: Victor Pascual Avila <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 19:13:51 +0200

Gonzalo,

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> this is a reminder of our cutoff for charter proposals, which is on Monday
> (September 21st). Per our previous email: "A charter proposal must consist
> of a minimum of a problem statement and at least one milestone/deliverable.
> This deadline will allow time for consideration of proposals that could
> potentially be "dispatched" prior to the WG session."
>
> A few of the topics we received arrived after the previous deadline, which
> was September 7th. We will be considering even those topics that arrived a
> bit late because we realize the deadline was quite tough to meet (specially
> for people that returned from their vacation right before the deadline).
>

As John mentioned, we don't believe we are in a position yet to propose
a charter. However, we hope to update
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-elwell-dispatch-identity-reqs-00.txt
before the meeting.

Cheers,
-Victor

> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>

-- 
Victor Pascual Ávila

---

From: "Milan Patel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 10:35:04 +0100

Hi,

I would like to add an additional topic to the DISPATCH charter - URI
parameters to describe the calling party category and toll class.

Previously, Calling Party Category (CPC) URI parameter was defined in a
draft by Rohan Mahy in the IPTEL group. 
There is still a need by carriers for this parameter and it is currently
also used within TISPAN and 3GPP. 
The motivation for defining the CPC URI parameter is to provide a
standardized method of providing information about the calling party and
the station used to originate a call. Currently, a number of proprietary
solutions are being used as a standardized solution is unavailable. 

My intention is to revise Rohan's draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mahy-iptel-cpc-06
And to take on board some of the comments received on the old IPTEL
list. 
My proposal is to provide a draft that defines 2 URI parameters: "cpc"
and "oli" indicating the category and tolls class of the calling party,
allowing mapping to parameters used in ISUP.

Best regards,
Milan

Milan Patel
Carrier Networks Core Standards
Nortel
[email-masked]
Telephone +44 162 843 2381 / ESN 560 2381
Mobile +44 774 053 9261 / ESN 748 9261

For the Companies listed below, The Institute of Chartered Accountants
in England and Wales authorises A R Bloom, S Harris and C Hill to act as
Insolvency Practitioners under section 390(2)(a) of the Insolvency Act
1986 and the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants authorises A
M Hudson to act as an Insolvency Practitioner under section 390(2)(a) of
the Insolvency Act 1986.

The affairs, business and property of the Companies are being managed by
the Joint Administrators, A R Bloom, S Harris, AM Hudson and C Hill who
act as agents of the Companies only and without personal liability.

The Companies are Nortel Networks UK Limited; Nortel Networks SA; Nortel
GmbH; Nortel Networks France SAS; Nortel Networks NV; Nortel Networks
SpA; Nortel Networks BV; Nortel Networks Polska SP Zoo; Nortel Networks
Hispania SA; Nortel Networks (Austria) GmbH; Nortel Networks sro; Nortel
Networks Engineering Service Kft; Nortel Networks Portugal SA; Nortel
Networks Slovensko sro; Nortel Networks Oy; Nortel Networks Romania SRL;
Nortel Networks AB; Nortel Networks International Finance & Holding BV
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Gonzalo Camarillo
Sent: 16 September 2009 15:13
To: DISPATCH
Subject: [dispatch] Cutoff for charter proposals on Monday

Folks,

Thanks,

Gonzalo
DISPATCH co-chair

---

From: "Richard Shockey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:24:56 -0400

I want to add some support to this idea but for a totally different reason.
This concept breaks open the issue that there have been some in the IETF
that objected to non-routing parameters used in TEL URI's and frankly this
bizarre restriction has caused me a world of grief.

Case in point.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-enum-cnam-08

What I'd like to see is this issue settled once and for all. What is and is
not acceptable use of the TEL URI? 

If Calling Party Catagory is acceptable use of the TEL paramameter then I
want CNAM.  

>  Behalf Of Milan Patel
>  Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 5:35 AM
>  To: Gonzalo Camarillo; DISPATCH
>  Subject: Re: [dispatch] Cutoff for charter proposals on Monday
>  
>  Hi,
>