Subject: [dispatch] terq charter revision

From: "Peterson, Jon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 18:27:14 -0500

Based on the comments previously received, this is a slight revision to the TeRQ charter. The fundamentals here though are pretty much unchanged: the plan is to do the framework and information model document and one binding document, rechartering if there is interest in doing any further binding documents.

Jon Peterson
NeuStar, Inc.

---

Title: Telephony-Related Queries
Acronym: terq
Area: Real-time Applications and Infrastructure
Area Director: TBD
Chair(s): TBD
Mailing address: TBD (currently [email-masked])

Description of Working Group

Several IETF efforts have studied the handling of telephone numbers on the Internet. For example, the ENUM working group specified a DNS-based approach to transforming telephone numbers into URIs; the DRINKS working group produced a provisioning system suitable for populating Internet directories of telephone numbers. The overall goal of this work has been to migrate the routing and directory functions of the telephone network onto the Internet, in order to simplify the implementation of Internet telephony and reduce the Internet's reliance on the infrastructure of the public switched telephone network. Ultimately, the requirements for this project diverged significantly from the original architecture and applicability of ENUM. Moreover, in the twelve years since ENUM was first chartered, Internet telephony has changed a great deal. As one example, today web-based applications are becoming more significant to Internet telephony, as are intelligent mobile devices. In these environments, there exists a capacity for richer queries and responses, as well as more sophisticated application logic to process requests, but also tougher security requirements. As such, this working group reconsiders the migration of routing and directory functions from the telephone network to the Internet by generalizing the base semantics of queries and responses in an abstract framework, and then defining possible transports and encodings for these messages.

The components of the chartered work include:

1. A framework and information model for the construction queries and responses. The information model will provide an abstract description of the semantics of the various elements and attributes that make up TeRQ messages. The framework will further establish the semantics of TeRQ transactions, describe how responses are matched with queries, and give an overview of the operation of the protocol. It will furthermore describe the overall security model of TeRQ, including confidentiality and access control measures necessary to preserve privacy.

2. A process for specifying bindings for the information model, which comprise transports and encodings. Transports specify the underlying protocols that will encapsulate TeRQ queries and responses. This working group is not chartered to define new underlying protocols, but will specify how the transaction model of TeRQ maps onto these underlying protocols. Potential underlying protocols include HTTP and DIAMETER. The encoding determines how TeRQ elements and attributes will be rendered in the object format carried by the transport; potential object formats would include JSON and XML and well as lower-layer encodings. Binding specifications must detail their implementation of the security and privacy requirements defined in the framework.

3. A set of one or more bindings compliant with the process described in (2), which provide a concrete instantiation of the protocol. This group will be initially chartered to create a single binding, though other may be a potential subject for ongoing work after a rechart. These bindings may accompany profiles that detail particular sets of attributes or elements relevant to a given deployment.

The TeRQ working group will coordinate with ongoing work in the DRINKS space in order to make sure that the TeRQ information model conforms with the needs of provisioning systems. Whenever possible, TeRQ will reuse existing IETF work. The syntax and semantics of telephone numbers, for example, have been the subject of a great deal of previous IETF work (notably RFC 3966), and the TeRQ working group will rely on this and related prior work. 

Goals and Deliverables:

Aug 2013	Submit Framework for Telephony Related Queries as Proposed Standard
Nov 2013	Submit one TeRQ Binding as Proposed Standard
Feb 2013	Recharter if additional bindings are required

---

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 17:25:17 -0500

I will probably miss the dispatch meeting at IETF 86 but I'm in favor of chartering this work. 

On Mar 7, 2013, at 5:27 PM, "Peterson, Jon" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Several IETF efforts have studied the handling of telephone numbers on the Internet. For example, the ENUM working group specified a DNS-based approach to transforming telephone numbers into URIs; the DRINKS working group produced a provisioning system suitable for populating Internet directories of telephone numbers. The overall goal of this work has been to migrate the routing and directory functions of the telephone network onto the Internet, in order to simplify the implementation of Internet telephony and reduce the Internet's reliance on the infrastructure of the public switched telephone network. Ultimately, the requirements for this project diverged significantly from the original architecture and applicability of ENUM. Moreover, in the twelve years since ENUM was first chartered, Internet telephony has changed a great deal. As one example, today web-based applications are becoming more significant to Internet telephony, as are intelligent mobile devices. In these env
> ironments, there exists a capacity for richer queries and responses, as well as more sophisticated application logic to process requests, but also tougher security requirements. As such, this working group reconsiders the migration of routing and directory functions from the telephone network to the Internet by generalizing the base semantics of queries and responses in an abstract framework, and then defining possible transports and encodings for these messages.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 19:30:18 -0400

Two questions/comments:

(1) It is not quite clear whether the scope is restricted to retrieval ("GET") or also updates by authorized entities ("PUT"). For HTTP, it seems relatively straightforward to specify both, less so for DIAMETER, but I don't see much of a problem with having several retrieval mechanisms.

(2) There is some relationship to the whois retrieval work, I believe. This should at least be explored.

Henning

---

From: David Schwartz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 06:03:17 +0000

+1

:D

(sent from my mobile device)

---

From: "PFAUTZ, PENN L" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 12:50:05 +0000

Jon:
I still have some questions about this enterprise:
1. What will be the basis for the information model to be developed? Will it address the needs of the service providers and regulators that currently control the E.164 space or is it end user/webRTC focused? Or both?
2. What was attractive about ENUM was the way in which it leveraged an existing protocol and ecosystem to make telephone numbers fit into IP. I'm not quite sure how to think of the current effort in those terms.
3. w/r/t to "richer queries and responses" and " more sophisticated application logic", the only thing that richer seems to mean is source-based. Do we really need a new framework for that? And people have already found ways to apply more sophisticated application logic by putting an ENUM front end on a relational database.
4. The statement about making sure the information model conforms to the needs of the provisioning systems concerns me in that, if we're taking the trouble to define an information model de novo, the dictates of the model ought to take precedence over the provisioning system rather than be restricted by it.
5. If we're serious about defining an encompassing information model I think a framework by August 2013 is way optimistic, unless there's something waiting in the wings.

Penn Pfautz
AT&T
+1-732-420-4962

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Peterson, Jon
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 6:27 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [dispatch] terq charter revision

Jon Peterson
NeuStar, Inc.

---

Goals and Deliverables:

---

From: "Richard Shockey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 20:24:37 -0400

+1 to these issues not to mention the larger problem of given the glacial
pace work moves through the IETF will this effort actually have any
significant impact on the real world requirements.

That said the limitations of the DNS model for number resolution have been
well known and required endless duct tape and bailing wire workarounds which
is why many operators adopted a database model based on SIP Redirect. 

That said I certainly have no objections to moving this forward.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of PFAUTZ, PENN L
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 8:50 AM
To: Peterson, Jon; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [dispatch] terq charter revision

Jon:
I still have some questions about this enterprise:
1. What will be the basis for the information model to be developed? Will it
address the needs of the service providers and regulators that currently
control the E.164 space or is it end user/webRTC focused? Or both?
2. What was attractive about ENUM was the way in which it leveraged an
existing protocol and ecosystem to make telephone numbers fit into IP. I'm
not quite sure how to think of the current effort in those terms.
3. w/r/t to "richer queries and responses" and " more sophisticated
application logic", the only thing that richer seems to mean is
source-based. Do we really need a new framework for that? And people have
already found ways to apply more sophisticated application logic by putting
an ENUM front end on a relational database.
4. The statement about making sure the information model conforms to the
needs of the provisioning systems concerns me in that, if we're taking the
trouble to define an information model de novo, the dictates of the model
ought to take precedence over the provisioning system rather than be
restricted by it.
5. If we're serious about defining an encompassing information model I think
a framework by August 2013 is way optimistic, unless there's something
waiting in the wings.

Penn Pfautz
AT&T
+1-732-420-4962

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Peterson, Jon
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 6:27 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [dispatch] terq charter revision

Based on the comments previously received, this is a slight revision to the
TeRQ charter. The fundamentals here though are pretty much unchanged: the
plan is to do the framework and information model document and one binding
document, rechartering if there is interest in doing any further binding
documents.

Jon Peterson
NeuStar, Inc.

---

Title: Telephony-Related Queries
Acronym: terq
Area: Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area Director: TBD
Chair(s): TBD
Mailing address: TBD (currently [email-masked])

Several IETF efforts have studied the handling of telephone numbers on the
Internet. For example, the ENUM working group specified a DNS-based approach
to transforming telephone numbers into URIs; the DRINKS working group
produced a provisioning system suitable for populating Internet directories
of telephone numbers. The overall goal of this work has been to migrate the
routing and directory functions of the telephone network onto the Internet,
in order to simplify the implementation of Internet telephony and reduce the
Internet's reliance on the infrastructure of the public switched telephone
network. Ultimately, the requirements for this project diverged
significantly from the original architecture and applicability of ENUM.
Moreover, in the twelve years since ENUM was first chartered, Internet
telephony has changed a great deal. As one example, today web-based
applications are becoming more significant to Internet telephony, as are
intelligent mobile devices. In these env  ironments, there exists a capacity
for richer queries and responses, as well as more sophisticated application
logic to process requests, but also tougher security requirements. As such,
this working group reconsiders the migration of routing and directory
functions from the telephone network to the Internet by generalizing the
base semantics of queries and responses in an abstract framework, and then
defining possible transports and encodings for these messages.

1. A framework and information model for the construction queries and
responses. The information model will provide an abstract description of the
semantics of the various elements and attributes that make up TeRQ messages.
The framework will further establish the semantics of TeRQ transactions,
describe how responses are matched with queries, and give an overview of the
operation of the protocol. It will furthermore describe the overall security
model of TeRQ, including confidentiality and access control measures
necessary to preserve privacy.

2. A process for specifying bindings for the information model, which
comprise transports and encodings. Transports specify the underlying
protocols that will encapsulate TeRQ queries and responses. This working
group is not chartered to define new underlying protocols, but will specify
how the transaction model of TeRQ maps onto these underlying protocols.
Potential underlying protocols include HTTP and DIAMETER. The encoding
determines how TeRQ elements and attributes will be rendered in the object
format carried by the transport; potential object formats would include JSON
and XML and well as lower-layer encodings. Binding specifications must
detail their implementation of the security and privacy requirements defined
in the framework.

3. A set of one or more bindings compliant with the process described in
(2), which provide a concrete instantiation of the protocol. This group will
be initially chartered to create a single binding, though other may be a
potential subject for ongoing work after a rechart. These bindings may
accompany profiles that detail particular sets of attributes or elements
relevant to a given deployment.

The TeRQ working group will coordinate with ongoing work in the DRINKS space
in order to make sure that the TeRQ information model conforms with the
needs of provisioning systems. Whenever possible, TeRQ will reuse existing
IETF work. The syntax and semantics of telephone numbers, for example, have
been the subject of a great deal of previous IETF work (notably RFC 3966),
and the TeRQ working group will rely on this and related prior work.

Goals and Deliverables:

Aug 2013        Submit Framework for Telephony Related Queries as Proposed
Standard