From richard@shockey.us Fri Dec 11 13:09:32 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F9A3A68F6 for ; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:09:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.445 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.445 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.780, BAYES_50=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b3I9dCm0t7ZT for ; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:09:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from outbound-mail-307.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-307.bluehost.com [67.222.53.253]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B9463A657C for ; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:09:31 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 14636 invoked by uid 0); 11 Dec 2009 21:09:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy6.bluehost.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2009 21:09:20 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language:X-Identified-User; b=CTrV2fU0baHksQpXM/NXXZZRONRwq4Al+i7/SNAacSa3Szj/o7iN2B/Sm8cDPuX7K9njc7Ux3YKYNUl224SlWQnyaVHCT7Fz0AwQl9rCVK7YKTjbpPrM4bvaO9KTPXW+; Received: from pool-96-241-233-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([96.241.233.91] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NJCjn-0005H9-Oi; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:09:20 -0700 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'IETF DRINKS WG'" Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:09:17 -0500 Message-ID: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acp6pjL6P/A/SjkxRp+SqBDxIogQOw== Content-Language: en-us X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 96.241.233.91 authed with richard+shockey.us} Subject: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:09:32 -0000 I've sent several notes to this list, the Design Team and others privately on the lack of progress. I have to conclude that there is no further interest in proceeding with DRINKS. Should I send a note to the AD's requesting that the DRINKS WG be shut down? This is very much a "speak now or else" note. Richard Shockey Shockey Consulting Chairman of the Board of Directors SIP Forum PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 skype: rshockey101 LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/rshockey101 http//www.sipforum.org From lendl@nic.at Tue Dec 15 06:00:47 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 295F53A68B4 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:00:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.17 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.17 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id coQR45Acq0LI for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:00:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bofh.priv.at (fardach.bofh.priv.at [88.198.34.164]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F88C3A67B3 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:00:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.0.241] (nat.labs.nic.at [83.136.33.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bofh.priv.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BA614C7C4; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:00:30 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4B27967D.7000403@nic.at> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:00:29 +0100 From: Otmar Lendl User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Shockey References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> In-Reply-To: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: IETF DRINKS WG Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:00:47 -0000 Richard Shockey wrote: > I've sent several notes to this list, the Design Team and others privately > on the lack of progress. > > I have to conclude that there is no further interest in proceeding with > DRINKS. > > Should I send a note to the AD's requesting that the DRINKS WG be shut down? I didn't like the direction this group was heading, and I do not have the time to propose alternative solutions. So, shutting down the group is fine with me. cheers, /ol -- // Otmar Lendl , T: +43 1 5056416 - 33, F: - 933 // From andy@hxr.us Tue Dec 15 08:33:06 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB033A68EB for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:33:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YOWo0LgTo5RW for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:33:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from zeke.ecotroph.net (zeke.ecotroph.net [70.164.19.155]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502273A68E4 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:33:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from zx80.arin.net ([::ffff:192.149.252.11]) (AUTH: PLAIN anewton, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by zeke.ecotroph.net with esmtp; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:32:50 -0500 id 015B00A9.4B27BA32.00001887 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Andrew Newton In-Reply-To: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:32:50 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> To: Richard Shockey X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Cc: 'IETF DRINKS WG' Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:33:06 -0000 It seems a shame that all the work already done would be thrown away. Is there no longer a need for this in the industry? Has the problem = this working group was formed to address been overcome by events? And if the group is shut down, would there be a possibility of having = the current work published as Informational? -andy On Dec 11, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: >=20 > I've sent several notes to this list, the Design Team and others = privately > on the lack of progress.=20 >=20 > I have to conclude that there is no further interest in proceeding = with > DRINKS. >=20 > Should I send a note to the AD's requesting that the DRINKS WG be shut = down? >=20 >=20 > This is very much a "speak now or else" note.=20 >=20 > Richard Shockey > Shockey Consulting > Chairman of the Board of Directors SIP Forum > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > skype: rshockey101=20 > LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/rshockey101 > http//www.sipforum.org >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From jf.mule@cablelabs.com Tue Dec 15 10:05:16 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A12E3A6ADF for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:05:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id leRzEwYwVOWs for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:05:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431AD3A6AD7 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:05:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id nBFI4xDG019716; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:04:59 -0700 Received: from srvxchg3.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.25) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:04:59 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:04:56 -0700 Message-ID: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? Thread-Index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHw References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> From: "Jean-Francois Mule" To: "Richard Shockey" X-Approved: ondar Cc: IETF DRINKS WG Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:05:16 -0000 Hi Rich, I have not received emails from you or Alex either privately or as part of the design team (which I think at some point I was an active participant in). Nothing personal but let's go on the record: do I have to contact my IT department or check my email filter rules? Or did I get dropped from the distribution list? While it does provide no excuses for the lack of progress (on my end), it means that authors need to be reminded they have duties to the WG at times. I would think that there is still interest given the industry talks around registry-to-registry communications. If folks think this is addressed by some recent events (to Andy's question), speak up. In my view, it is not. Jean-Francois. > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Newton > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 9:33 AM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: 'IETF DRINKS WG' > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? >=20 > It seems a shame that all the work already done would be thrown > away. >=20 > Is there no longer a need for this in the industry? Has the > problem this working group was formed to address been overcome by > events? >=20 > And if the group is shut down, would there be a possibility of > having the current work published as Informational? >=20 > -andy >=20 > On Dec 11, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: >=20 > > > > I've sent several notes to this list, the Design Team and others > privately > > on the lack of progress. > > > > I have to conclude that there is no further interest in > proceeding with > > DRINKS. > > > > Should I send a note to the AD's requesting that the DRINKS WG be > shut down? > > > > > > This is very much a "speak now or else" note. > > > > Richard Shockey > > Shockey Consulting > > Chairman of the Board of Directors SIP Forum > > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > > > skype: rshockey101 > > LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/rshockey101 > > http//www.sipforum.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > drinks mailing list > > drinks@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks >=20 > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From richard@shockey.us Tue Dec 15 11:44:30 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B229A3A6AED for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:44:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.867, BAYES_50=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g86Xqhqaz5Ja for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:44:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from outbound-mail-108.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-108.bluehost.com [69.89.22.8]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C86F13A6AD7 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:44:29 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 25177 invoked by uid 0); 15 Dec 2009 19:44:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 15 Dec 2009 19:44:15 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:thread-index:Content-Language:X-Identified-User; b=HdYTQEkngZFukrgXIK7day+87kLcVpMWPod7gI4PmHLp9gXmVdkSWzqDJHDGpOoMysSs95Gd2Etgcd3y75L7OqlCCBvAfiVT+EJ/Slza5RhDPQmkr2o7DzN3O/lyjiLN; Received: from pool-96-241-233-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([96.241.233.91] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NKdJd-0007o8-R1; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:44:15 -0700 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Jean-Francois Mule'" , "'IETF DRINKS WG'" References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:44:10 -0500 Message-ID: <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 thread-index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHwAAOJD1A= Content-Language: en-us X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 96.241.233.91 authed with richard+shockey.us} Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:44:30 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 1:05 PM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > Hi Rich, > > I have not received emails from you or Alex either privately or as > part of the design team (which I think at some point I was an active > participant in). Nothing personal but let's go on the record: do I > have > to contact my IT department or check my email filter rules? Or did I > get dropped from the distribution list? Check with your IT dept ..I sent notes to you personally and through the design team lists etc and on this one as well. It happens.. > While it does provide no excuses for the lack of progress (on my end), > it means that authors need to be reminded they have duties to the WG > at times. > > I would think that there is still interest given the industry talks > around registry-to-registry communications. If folks think this is > addressed by some recent events (to Andy's question), speak up. In my > view, it is not. But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing the work? Privately I hear conflicting views. From jf.mule@cablelabs.com Tue Dec 15 13:40:04 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F5533A6AFB for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:40:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F6V4JRT+CjE3 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:40:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 822413A6B13 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:40:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id nBFLdnR7004883; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:39:49 -0700 Received: from srvxchg3.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.25) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:39:49 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:39:47 -0700 Message-ID: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? Thread-Index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHwAAOJD1AABCwpsA== References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us> From: "Jean-Francois Mule" To: "Richard Shockey" X-Approved: ondar Cc: IETF DRINKS WG Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:40:04 -0000 Just so that you know, I checked with Sumanth and Manjul and none of us got the message you sent on 12/8. > But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing > the > work? Privately I hear conflicting views. I'm interested in continuing the work. Who else? Jean-Francois. > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:44 PM > To: Jean-Francois Mule; 'IETF DRINKS WG' > Subject: RE: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] > On > > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 1:05 PM > > To: Richard Shockey > > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG > > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > > > Hi Rich, > > > > I have not received emails from you or Alex either privately > or as > > part of the design team (which I think at some point I was an > active > > participant in). Nothing personal but let's go on the record: > do I > > have > > to contact my IT department or check my email filter rules? Or > did I > > get dropped from the distribution list? >=20 > Check with your IT dept ..I sent notes to you personally and > through the > design team lists etc and on this one as well. It happens.. >=20 > > While it does provide no excuses for the lack of progress (on my > end), > > it means that authors need to be reminded they have duties to > the WG > > at times. > > > > I would think that there is still interest given the industry > talks > > around registry-to-registry communications. If folks think this > is > > addressed by some recent events (to Andy's question), speak up. > In my > > view, it is not. >=20 >=20 > But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing > the > work? Privately I hear conflicting views. From richard@shockey.us Tue Dec 15 14:05:35 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF323A6B1A for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:05:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.492 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.492 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.827, BAYES_50=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BnQmCLlQ1Ord for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:05:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from outbound-mail-06.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-06.bluehost.com [69.89.17.206]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0FF683A6B18 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:05:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 32474 invoked by uid 0); 15 Dec 2009 22:05:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy1.bluehost.com with SMTP; 15 Dec 2009 22:05:20 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:thread-index:Content-Language:X-Identified-User; b=j48bX9Lqn8mDJnqggGoe96lWhOlpHdmSIiX2mqw+gEHa08Cb/OWbfuMsJixPgIDVDffi8OJnpjppkwon36/3HYABnYOyATFYZxWQhb0zN94Fted7FE7BewXQR433oNE7; Received: from pool-96-241-233-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([96.241.233.91] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NKfWC-0002E9-9p for drinks@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:05:20 -0700 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'IETF DRINKS WG'" References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:05:16 -0500 Message-ID: <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 thread-index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHwAAOJD1AABCwpsAAAq5sg Content-Language: en-us X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 96.241.233.91 authed with richard+shockey.us} Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:05:35 -0000 This is was the note I privately sent on the 8th Somebody's Bayesian filter is a little tight I would assume, but no harm done. The question is still relevant. No progress since August might lead one to believe there is no more interest. It's the chairs obligation to try and keep the work on track or take remedial action. Alexander has been on family leave the last couple of weeks ( first kid, boy I'm told ). -----Original Message----- From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:00 AM To: 'Guyton, Deborah A'; 'Jean-Francois Mule'; 'Cartwright, Kenneth'; 'Alexander Mayrhofer'; 'Maharishi, Manjul'; 'Cartwright, Kenneth'; 'Spencer Dawkins'; 'Sumanth Channabasappa' Subject: I've been trying to contact some of you via mail etc and on the list. Obviously there is no progress on either the DRINKS requirements or protocol draft and the chairs need some guidance on what is going on. If there is no interest in proceeding then the chairs can recommend to the AD's that the WG either be shut down or put into suspension. We just know. > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 4:40 PM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > Just so that you know, I checked with Sumanth and Manjul and none of > us > got the message you sent on 12/8. > > > But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing > > the > > work? Privately I hear conflicting views. > > I'm interested in continuing the work. Who else? > > Jean-Francois. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:44 PM > > To: Jean-Francois Mule; 'IETF DRINKS WG' > > Subject: RE: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] > > On > > > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 1:05 PM > > > To: Richard Shockey > > > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG > > > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > > > > > Hi Rich, > > > > > > I have not received emails from you or Alex either privately > > or as > > > part of the design team (which I think at some point I was an > > active > > > participant in). Nothing personal but let's go on the record: > > do I > > > have > > > to contact my IT department or check my email filter rules? Or > > did I > > > get dropped from the distribution list? > > > > Check with your IT dept ..I sent notes to you personally and > > through the > > design team lists etc and on this one as well. It happens.. > > > > > While it does provide no excuses for the lack of progress (on my > > end), > > > it means that authors need to be reminded they have duties to > > the WG > > > at times. > > > > > > I would think that there is still interest given the industry > > talks > > > around registry-to-registry communications. If folks think this > > is > > > addressed by some recent events (to Andy's question), speak up. > > In my > > > view, it is not. > > > > > > But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing > > the > > work? Privately I hear conflicting views. > > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From mmaharishi@tnsi.com Tue Dec 15 14:32:12 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C5F83A684A for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:32:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AFycmLGA1EHC for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:32:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnsi.com (relayus.tnsi.com [208.224.248.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF153A6B32 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:32:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from ([172.17.7.231]) by relayus.tnsi.com with ESMTP with TLS id 4440551.38490205; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:36:44 -0500 Received: from TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com ([172.17.7.219]) by MAIL-HUB-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com ([172.17.7.231]) with mapi; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:31:47 -0500 From: "Maharishi, Manjul" To: Richard Shockey , 'IETF DRINKS WG' Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:31:43 -0500 Thread-Topic: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? Thread-Index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHwAAOJD1AABCwpsAAAq5sgAAEITKA= Message-ID: <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA0919DCD37A@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> In-Reply-To: <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:32:12 -0000 Hello Richard, Yes, I too didn't get the email sent to the Design team. Can you pls confirm what email address you used for me (due to the not-so-r= ecent divestiture of my group from VeriSign to TNS, it may have gone to the= older - and not functional anymore - email address; in which case, it woul= d have bounced back!). I think that not having any meeting in the last IETF (not even online-only)= added to the lack-of-progress on this front. Thanks. Manjul -----Original Message----- From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Richard Shockey Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 5:05 PM To: 'IETF DRINKS WG' Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? This is was the note I privately sent on the 8th Somebody's Bayesian filter is a little tight I would assume, but no harm do= ne. The question is still relevant. No progress since August might lead one to believe there is no more interes= t. It's the chairs obligation to try and keep the work on track or take remedi= al action. Alexander has been on family leave the last couple of weeks ( first kid, bo= y I'm told ). -----Original Message----- From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:00 AM To: 'Guyton, Deborah A'; 'Jean-Francois Mule'; 'Cartwright, Kenneth'; 'Alex= ander Mayrhofer'; 'Maharishi, Manjul'; 'Cartwright, Kenneth'; 'Spencer Dawk= ins'; 'Sumanth Channabasappa' Subject: I've been trying to contact some of you via mail etc and on the li= st. Obviously there is no progress on either the DRINKS requirements or protoco= l draft and the chairs need some guidance on what is going on. If there is no interest in proceeding then the chairs can recommend to the AD's that the W= G either be shut down or put into suspension. We just know. > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 4:40 PM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > Just so that you know, I checked with Sumanth and Manjul and none of > us > got the message you sent on 12/8. > > > But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing > > the > > work? Privately I hear conflicting views. > > I'm interested in continuing the work. Who else? > > Jean-Francois. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:44 PM > > To: Jean-Francois Mule; 'IETF DRINKS WG' > > Subject: RE: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] > > On > > > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 1:05 PM > > > To: Richard Shockey > > > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG > > > Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? > > > > > > Hi Rich, > > > > > > I have not received emails from you or Alex either privately > > or as > > > part of the design team (which I think at some point I was an > > active > > > participant in). Nothing personal but let's go on the record: > > do I > > > have > > > to contact my IT department or check my email filter rules? Or > > did I > > > get dropped from the distribution list? > > > > Check with your IT dept ..I sent notes to you personally and > > through the > > design team lists etc and on this one as well. It happens.. > > > > > While it does provide no excuses for the lack of progress (on my > > end), > > > it means that authors need to be reminded they have duties to > > the WG > > > at times. > > > > > > I would think that there is still interest given the industry > > talks > > > around registry-to-registry communications. If folks think this > > is > > > addressed by some recent events (to Andy's question), speak up. > > In my > > > view, it is not. > > > > > > But to the point .. IYHO is there sufficient interest in continuing > > the > > work? Privately I hear conflicting views. > > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks _______________________________________________ drinks mailing list drinks@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information of Transaction Network Serv= ices. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If = you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail a= nd destroy all copies of the original message. From richard@shockey.us Tue Dec 15 17:35:39 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D55983A68B0 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:35:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.423 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.758, BAYES_50=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7QYSE4Y6N1Xl for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:35:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from outbound-mail-142.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-142.bluehost.com [67.222.38.32]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1BD243A68A2 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:35:36 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 8845 invoked by uid 0); 16 Dec 2009 01:35:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy5.bluehost.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2009 01:35:22 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:thread-index:Content-Language:X-Identified-User; b=dM9AHj13nq/hcH/Nf7FcMHbWj172Pb4wFRs4aziPEcXO9Ebk6ifkSWyFCbOw+BIRg3XrZUNYT0xmRIPw4lJQ45m7SwVSeHfFnJHmHDjkq73mAUyB8e1VX6FJrotsINu7; Received: from pool-96-241-233-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([96.241.233.91] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NKinS-00024p-Ac; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:35:22 -0700 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'Maharishi, Manjul'" , "'IETF DRINKS WG'" References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA0919DCD37A@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> In-Reply-To: <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA0919DCD37A@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:35:18 -0500 Message-ID: <01d401ca7df0$06afd490$140f7db0$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 thread-index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHwAAOJD1AABCwpsAAAq5sgAAEITKAABky9wA== Content-Language: en-us X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 96.241.233.91 authed with richard+shockey.us} Subject: Re: [drinks] Shutting down the DRINKS WG? X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:35:40 -0000 > > Yes, I too didn't get the email sent to the Design team. > > Can you pls confirm what email address you used for me (due to the > not-so-recent divestiture of my group from VeriSign to TNS, it may > have gone to the older - and not functional anymore - email address; > in which case, it would have bounced back!). Well that was certainly my fault. But the last communication we had from the design team was late June and as I noted the last real work discussion on the list was in August. That does not answer the question at hand. Do people really want to do this work and if so what is the plan and agreement on milestones. > I think that not having any meeting in the last IETF (not even online- > only) added to the lack-of-progress on this front. Well that decision made after the chairs made a doodle poll that very few people could attend Hiroshima. That is not an excuse for lack of activity or progress. The chairs are not necessarily responsible for doing the work only that it gets done. From alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at Wed Dec 16 07:02:00 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1D43A63EB for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:02:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.43 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.43 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8zWs-CxJpDfW for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:01:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sbg.nic.at (mail.sbg.nic.at [192.174.68.200]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF07A3A6957 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:01:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] by mail.sbg.nic.at with XWall v3.44 ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:01:17 +0100 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:01:16 +0100 Message-ID: <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> In-Reply-To: <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) Thread-Index: Acp9pEKJqv3FOnoJRBia/ZZPqCxMPAAC9fHwAAOJD1AABCwpsAAAq5sgACFlZhA= References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> From: "Alexander Mayrhofer" To: "Richard Shockey" , "IETF DRINKS WG" X-XWALL-BCKS: auto Subject: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:02:00 -0000 > Alexander has been on family leave the last couple of weeks (=20 > first kid, boy > I'm told ). Hello,=20 Right - i haven't been on leave of the last few weeks, but i haven't been able to spend a lot of time for DRINKS recently. However, here we go: [chair hat on] I agree that there has been very little progress in recent months. My impression is that this was due to the following reasons: - No meeting in Hiroshima (which obviously meant no motivation to "get something done for the meeting) - Stockholm was sort of an "milestone", towards which the design team worked, and we (=3D the chairs) have not properly picked up on progress since then as well (new milestones, design team meetings, etc.) - The general state of the industry, with people focusing on different things rather than standardization - The concept of the "Design team" probably put off "regular" WG participants, because a lot of work was going on only within the team, and was not properly communicated back to the group (my personal fault, probably), which created a situation that nobody outside the design team is actively participating anymore. I still *do* think that having a core team is necessary, but that core team needs to communicate much more openly to the rest of the group. - Some people were not satisfied with the direction that group / the design team was heading, and hence stopped contributing (or even lurking). Therefore, i think that the group has the following options: A) "Continue as before Stockholm": Post new milestones that still reflect the current work plan (requirements, protocol, transport), pick up work again on the existing documents (in the existing direction!), and try to get them out ASAP. This will mean that some former participants will still not be happy with the outcome, which in turn might mean that there will be less deployment than we'd like to have. B) "Reconsider": Gather feedback from WG participants that have ceased to participate, and amend the current work direction (more about that below..). This could bring more participants back "into the boat", but means that we'd have to re-think certain approaches. C) "Suspend": Put the WG to sleep (I'm an expert in doing that to 2 week old babies currently only, though). That means we wait for ... Err.... Whatever. Personally, i doubt that "waiting" increases the interest in a certain topic, unless the demand in the industry suddenly rises. Waiting is also unlikely to create significant progress to the documents, obviously. D) "Shut down": This is what Richard has been talking about. Declare the WG a failure, and remove it from the RAI work plan. Documents would expire. Feedback about those options is appreciated. [chair hat off] (Note: these are moer rough thoughts rather then the PerfectPlan(tm) ) Personally as a WG participang, i would prefer option B). It would be sad to throw away all the work that we have done so far, and i think that we could get some "fresh air" into the group if we did re-consider our direction a little bit. I think there's still enough interest in the original problem, and i think (even though we have failed at this in the past) it *is* important to solve the LUF/LRF distinction. Also, particularly Penn's message=20 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/drinks/current/msg00527.html "we'll look for something simpler" got me thinking that we probably tried to do too many things at once, somewhere have a structural problem in our approach, and that seperating out might be a good thing. During the work of collecting the use cases and requirements, we came up with a lot of dimensions, and particularly the combination of the dimensions makes the potential protocol very complicated (eg. the introduction of timed transactions is a nightmare from the complexity standpoint!) >From my perspective, we have one *very* significant constraint in this group: We don't have the expertise, and hence CANNOT create a routing protocol (we're in the wrong area as well). However, while the LUF step clearly is a "lookup/directory" step (as the name says), LRF is - nomen est omen - really close to full-fledged routing protocol (particularly in the case of indirect peering) - so the somewhat frustrating part of our work is that we can only discuss which kind of data would be needed to be able to perform the routing step, but not how the actual routing protocol works. The "magic ball" part of that piece of work now is to create a provisioning protocol for a routing protocol that does not exist :-o And, i don't see such a "rouing protocol" to be created anytime soon - there might exist several such routing protocols in proprietory implementations, but there's no IETF protocol for that (well, there's TRIP..) Anyway, if we decided to "reconsider", we could do the following - Doublecheck Terminology (We have agreed to re-use SPEERMINT terminology where possible, any definition that is not included in SPEERMINT should go into the use cases / requirements draft). Note that this step would contain the hard nut of identifying what LUF/LRF means for DRINKS (yes, i think there's no way around it, because of the difference in lookup/location and routing/path) - Revisit requirements and use cases. Particularly, check use cases with "former participants", and see what needs to be added (or, even better, simplified) to fulfill their needs. - Create a solid definition of what data points are contained in SED (this is about the question whether NAPTRs alone is good enough or not) - Doublecheck the object model, and try hard at simplifing it (or, at least ensure that simpler use cases only need a subset of the object model to work) - Revisit the protocol, and again try to simplify it, so that simple use cases only require a very simple subset of the protocol. Some other unsorted thoughts that come to my mind (problems that we haven't been addressing so far): - A "Public Identifier" can be a phone number, but also a SIP URI. Those public identifiers are "looked up" to a "Destination Group". There's one protocol that allows doing that for phone numbers (ENUM in whater flavour), but there's no such protocol if the original identifier is a SIP URI. Who does fill that hole? - The "Destination Group" has to be some global identifier. We have not yet discussed what kind of identifier that is (FQDN? ITAD? Some other identifier for which we need to create an IANA registry? URI?). It seems to me that the definition of that "Destination Group" alone would require some significant work - We haven't yet identified what the data elements of action SPEERMINT type routing are. I've had a draft listing some of the elements. For most of them, there's no definition of how to put them into a NAPTR - how do we proceed about that? The draft is here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mayrhofer-drinks-sed-elements-00 I'm sure there are more "interesting" issues that we come up once we start to look at all the issues in detail. (and the question to the group would be is there enough contribution to handle all that?) Alex From Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Wed Dec 16 07:22:13 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 259143A6983; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:22:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.773 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.773 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.825, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 78dY4aHY49+I; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:22:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nominet.org.uk (mx4.nominet.org.uk [213.248.199.24]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA343A69AA; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:22:03 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: s=main.dk.nominet.selector; d=nominet.org.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:Received:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc: Subject:MIME-Version:X-Mailer:Message-ID:From:Date: X-MIMETrack:Content-Type; b=UKCkE+z2NFeKtLTfyxZ4cN1W4qVCGoXS5/xvVxdxuS/cH54uPYkgMpMy d8UQ25pLQ9CxPUfokx6B6ms5u/kBBqJVSvITL68m0lJW6HNEm8c+lPRx9 I2fWUmoV8ijmDYe; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nominet.org.uk; i=Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; q=dns/txt; s=main.dkim.nominet.selector; t=1260976911; x=1292512911; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk|Subject:=20Re:=20[drin ks]=20Options=20(Was:=20Shutting=20down=20the=20DRINKS=20 WG?)|Date:=20Wed,=2016=20Dec=202009=2015:21:30=20+0000 |Message-ID:=20|To:=20"Alexander=20Mayrh ofer"=20|Cc:=20"IETF=20DRINKS =20WG"=20,=0D=0A=09drinks-bounces@ietf.o rg,=0D=0A=09"Richard=20Shockey"=20 |MIME-Version:=201.0|In-Reply-To:=20<8BC845943058D844ABFC 73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at>|References:=20 <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us>=09=0D=0A=09<9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB58 7781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com>=09<014501ca7 dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7 C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com>=0D=0A=09<019b01ca7dd2$ afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us>=20<8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466 508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at>; bh=PwSWEi54q2zw5DjSvoM+1rzG4HH9FoTflfx71RHgSU0=; b=5C+yaoaif1LaF02UvbxGMqDf+fJvYCDvDERvtPFz2A89O98nTaGiMUc4 KReKdMhrOkd6JH66gLzosqZjxzANdUc3av6pVmQ0kzHwC5JVhsvvIIJ+5 ERbj5s3Ct23nZh+; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,406,1257120000"; d="scan'208";a="14953905" Received: from notes1.nominet.org.uk ([213.248.197.128]) by mx4.nominet.org.uk with ESMTP; 16 Dec 2009 15:21:32 +0000 In-Reply-To: <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> To: "Alexander Mayrhofer" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5 December 05, 2008 Message-ID: From: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:21:30 +0000 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes1/Nominet(Release 7.0.1FP1 | May 25, 2006) at 16/12/2009 03:21:31 PM, Serialize complete at 16/12/2009 03:21:31 PM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 00545DB28025768E_=" Cc: IETF DRINKS WG , drinks-bounces@ietf.org, Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:22:14 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 00545DB28025768E_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Alex, Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are. I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was going, so I favour your '(b)' approach. On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back. The general intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness. Ray --=_alternative 00545DB28025768E_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Alex,

Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are.

I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was going, so I favour your '(b)' approach.

On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back.  The general intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness.

Ray


--=_alternative 00545DB28025768E_=-- From richard@shockey.us Wed Dec 16 09:31:58 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275D13A68E2 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:31:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.407 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.407 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.743, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8dAN-VaXIs0O for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:31:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from outbound-mail-139.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-139.bluehost.com [67.222.39.29]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7083A3A688B for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:31:48 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 17350 invoked by uid 0); 16 Dec 2009 17:31:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy4.bluehost.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2009 17:31:33 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-language:X-Identified-User; b=AaK3QAfLULNEJk3JcOd/SMEYlDUYTquF21p4d1uRVuz4DfJMxGKExxedykh4lPRDnHL8th5uB5LfFOJlMKYqcGwtxeLp8tdWGRKzLuVWfQ6MFBKc3cwSG2RgtOG7b00z; Received: from pool-96-241-233-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([96.241.233.91] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NKxin-0002GH-FA; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:31:33 -0700 From: "Richard Shockey" To: , "'IETF DRINKS WG'" References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:31:31 -0500 Message-ID: <010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0102_01CA7E4B.B2C1C210" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acp+Y4V+Pw9Kwbd+S7W9a/viV8b2+wADtsXw Content-language: en-us X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 96.241.233.91 authed with richard+shockey.us} Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:31:58 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0102_01CA7E4B.B2C1C210 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Chair hat off, Alex has summed the issues up very well indeed. I'm not going to be prescriptive and suggest which option I prefer, but I am concerned about the meta issue of "What is the demand for this protocol?". I'm certainly getting mixed private messages from the carriers on what they perceive is the real market for DRINKS etc. Is it SSP to Registry, Registry to Registry Internal provisioning of localized number translation databases ( aka IP-SCP's ) etc. >From a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal more about the use of SPID's or the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional mechanism to full URI based data exchanges. This is TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of Interconnection. In this scenario the actually URI for interconnection is masked and is ultimately a private bi-lateral exchange between consenting SSP which somewhat maps to the current business model. And as some of you have seen recently I'm very supportive of what Bernie is proposing to do with E2M metadata in ENUM. He's trying to form a WG through DISPATCH right now. The other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile and landline) are in a world of financial hurt , ARPU continues to decline, CAPEX / R&D budgets are not what they used to be. The supplier community is not doing that great either. This may not be a high priority and realistically this protocol is directed towards carriers. To be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the GSM mobile operators interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling to me since their stated IP interconnection strategy is based in part on the use of ENUM like databases. " How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers into those databases?", I ask. I don't get an answer. From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:22 AM To: Alexander Mayrhofer Cc: IETF DRINKS WG; drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) Alex, Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are. I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was going, so I favour your '(b)' approach. On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back. The general intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness. Ray ------=_NextPart_000_0102_01CA7E4B.B2C1C210 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Chair hat off,

 

Alex has summed the issues up very well indeed. =

 

I’m not going to be prescriptive and suggest which = option I prefer, but I am concerned about the meta issue of “What is the = demand for this protocol?”.  I’m certainly getting mixed = private messages from the carriers on what they perceive is the real market for DRINKS etc.  Is it  SSP to Registry,  Registry to Registry = Internal provisioning of localized number translation databases ( aka = IP-SCP’s ) etc.

 

From a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal = more about the use of SPID’s or the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional = mechanism to full URI based data exchanges. This is = TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of Interconnection.   In this scenario the actually URI for interconnection is masked and is ultimately a private bi-lateral exchange between consenting SSP which = somewhat maps to the current business model.   And as some of you have = seen recently I’m very supportive of what Bernie is proposing to do = with E2M metadata in ENUM. He’s trying to form a WG through DISPATCH right = now.

 

The other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile = and landline) are in a world of financial hurt , ARPU continues to decline, = CAPEX / R&D budgets are not what they used to be.  The supplier = community is not doing that great either. This may not be a high priority and = realistically this protocol is directed towards carriers.

 

To be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the = GSM mobile operators interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling  to = me since their stated IP interconnection strategy is based in part on the = use of ENUM like databases.

 

“ How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers = into those databases?”, I ask. I don’t get an answer. =

 

From:= drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:22 AM
To: Alexander Mayrhofer
Cc: IETF DRINKS WG; drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey
Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS = WG?)

 

Alex,

Thanks, that's a useful summary of = where we are.

I'm one of those who was unhappy = with the direction the group was going, so I favour your '(b)' = approach.

On the question of DG identifiers, = don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time = back.  The general intent was that the DG be relatively = "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also = suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global = uniqueness.

Ray

------=_NextPart_000_0102_01CA7E4B.B2C1C210-- From andy@hxr.us Wed Dec 16 10:01:48 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12C3F3A69F1 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:01:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CqxUqoZrFt9i for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:01:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from zeke.ecotroph.net (zeke.ecotroph.net [70.164.19.155]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F080C3A69BB for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:01:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from zx80.arin.net ([::ffff:192.149.252.11]) (AUTH: PLAIN anewton, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,AES128-SHA) by zeke.ecotroph.net with esmtp; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:01:31 -0500 id 015B00BA.4B29207B.0000505C Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 From: Andrew Newton In-Reply-To: <010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:01:30 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <26330DBF-0078-42C0-825E-D67B75C7B9E1@hxr.us> References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> <010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> To: Richard Shockey X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Cc: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk, 'IETF DRINKS WG' Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:01:48 -0000 It is one thing to ask if this work has been overcome by events, but if = we are asking about the scope of the protocol then the IETF/IESG did not = do its job during the chartering of the group. I cam away from Stockholm thinking the working group had made a bunch of = reasonable decisions. I didn't agree with all of them, but everything = seemed reasonable and rational. If people are saying they don't like = the direction this work is now taking, they speak now. -andy On Dec 16, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: > Chair hat off, > =20 > Alex has summed the issues up very well indeed. > =20 > I=92m not going to be prescriptive and suggest which option I prefer, = but I am concerned about the meta issue of =93What is the demand for = this protocol?=94. I=92m certainly getting mixed private messages from = the carriers on what they perceive is the real market for DRINKS etc. = Is it SSP to Registry, Registry to Registry Internal provisioning of = localized number translation databases ( aka IP-SCP=92s ) etc. > =20 > =46rom a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal more about the = use of SPID=92s or the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional mechanism = to full URI based data exchanges. This is TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of = Interconnection. In this scenario the actually URI for interconnection = is masked and is ultimately a private bi-lateral exchange between = consenting SSP which somewhat maps to the current business model. And = as some of you have seen recently I=92m very supportive of what Bernie = is proposing to do with E2M metadata in ENUM. He=92s trying to form a WG = through DISPATCH right now. > =20 > The other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile and landline) = are in a world of financial hurt , ARPU continues to decline, CAPEX / = R&D budgets are not what they used to be. The supplier community is not = doing that great either. This may not be a high priority and = realistically this protocol is directed towards carriers. > =20 > To be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the GSM mobile = operators interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling to me since = their stated IP interconnection strategy is based in part on the use of = ENUM like databases. > =20 > =93 How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers into those = databases?=94, I ask. I don=92t get an answer. > =20 > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk > Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:22 AM > To: Alexander Mayrhofer > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG; drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey > Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) > =20 > Alex,=20 >=20 > Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are.=20 >=20 > I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was = going, so I favour your '(b)' approach.=20 >=20 > On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an = (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back. The general = intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little meaning = could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that it be = suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness.=20 >=20 > Ray=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From lendl@nic.at Thu Dec 17 06:08:08 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F25B83A685A for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:08:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.13 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.13 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LixJogtziMcy for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:08:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bofh.priv.at (fardach.bofh.priv.at [88.198.34.164]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB153A67D6 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:08:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.0.241] (nat.labs.nic.at [83.136.33.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bofh.priv.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DF874C2A9; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:07:50 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4B2A3B36.3020707@nic.at> Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:07:50 +0100 From: Otmar Lendl User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF DRINKS WG References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com><019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us><8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [drinks] Options X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:08:08 -0000 Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk wrote: > > Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are. > > I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was going, > so I favour your '(b)' approach. Agreed on both counts. My analysis and recommendations are here: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/drinks/current/msg00529.html /ol -- // Otmar Lendl , T: +43 1 5056416 - 33, F: - 933 // From jf.mule@cablelabs.com Thu Dec 17 09:56:11 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3AFB3A68EA for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:56:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BSjCxkbiURyJ for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:56:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00DB43A69C7 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:56:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id nBHHtrsp011502; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:55:53 -0700 Received: from srvxchg3.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.25) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:55:53 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:55:49 -0700 Message-ID: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF90@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <26330DBF-0078-42C0-825E-D67B75C7B9E1@hxr.us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) Thread-Index: Acp+edDUmWEkpGn5QKOU4TpmUpKlJQAx8B+g References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at><010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> <26330DBF-0078-42C0-825E-D67B75C7B9E1@hxr.us> From: "Jean-Francois Mule" To: "Andrew Newton" X-Approved: ondar Cc: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk, IETF DRINKS WG , Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:56:12 -0000 Andy wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Newton > Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 11:01 AM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; 'IETF DRINKS WG' > Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) >=20 > It is one thing to ask if this work has been overcome by events, > but if we are asking about the scope of the protocol then the > IETF/IESG did not do its job during the chartering of the group. Agreed. And let's ask the question: what happen between the chartering and the Stockholm meeting? We had several folks involved in the requirements design team, we put out a skeletum for the protocol for bashing. Did all the folks who attended those calls thought this work was of no use?=20 =20 > I cam away from Stockholm thinking the working group had made a > bunch of reasonable decisions. I didn't agree with all of them, > but everything seemed reasonable and rational. If people are > saying they don't like the direction this work is now taking, they > speak now. +1 Not only that but those folks need to write I-Ds. Besides Otmar (who was for the record opposed to the wg to start with), where are the other opposing views? I for sure am not saying that what we have is right. But having a discussion on shutting down the group seems way premature to me. Jean-Francois. >=20 > -andy >=20 >=20 > On Dec 16, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: >=20 > > Chair hat off, > > > > Alex has summed the issues up very well indeed. > > > > I'm not going to be prescriptive and suggest which option I > prefer, but I am concerned about the meta issue of "What is the > demand for this protocol?". I'm certainly getting mixed private > messages from the carriers on what they perceive is the real market > for DRINKS etc. Is it SSP to Registry, Registry to Registry > Internal provisioning of localized number translation databases ( > aka IP-SCP's ) etc. > > > > From a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal more about > the use of SPID's or the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional > mechanism to full URI based data exchanges. This is > TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of Interconnection. In this scenario the > actually URI for interconnection is masked and is ultimately a > private bi-lateral exchange between consenting SSP which somewhat > maps to the current business model. And as some of you have seen > recently I'm very supportive of what Bernie is proposing to do with > E2M metadata in ENUM. He's trying to form a WG through DISPATCH > right now. > > > > The other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile and > landline) are in a world of financial hurt , ARPU continues to > decline, CAPEX / R&D budgets are not what they used to be. The > supplier community is not doing that great either. This may not be > a high priority and realistically this protocol is directed towards > carriers. > > > > To be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the GSM mobile > operators interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling to me > since their stated IP interconnection strategy is based in part on > the use of ENUM like databases. > > > > " How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers into those > databases?", I ask. I don't get an answer. > > > > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk > > Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:22 AM > > To: Alexander Mayrhofer > > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG; drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey > > Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) > > > > Alex, > > > > Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are. > > > > I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was > going, so I favour your '(b)' approach. > > > > On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an > (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back. The general > intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little > meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that > it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness. > > > > Ray > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > drinks mailing list > > drinks@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks >=20 > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From jf.mule@cablelabs.com Thu Dec 17 10:12:32 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F66C3A69C7 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:12:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vI7-APB296KZ for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:12:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A38923A6996 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:12:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id nBHICF0A013359 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:12:15 -0700 Received: from srvxchg3.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.25) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:12:15 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable x-cr-hashedpuzzle: otQ= APdI BiW6 CQ9D CSVA CZqE CqLg DPqG D2rz D71Z ELC1 HC1W Iaz8 Isb/ Jq1W Lvpy; 1; ZAByAGkAbgBrAHMAQABpAGUAdABmAC4AbwByAGcA; Sosha1_v1; 7; {C0C6D962-0CFB-43AD-8070-CBFC9512E1ED}; agBmAC4AbQB1AGwAZQBAAGMAYQBiAGwAZQBsAGEAYgBzAC4AYwBvAG0A; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:12:08 GMT; VABoAGUAIABuAGUAZQBkAHMAIABmAG8AcgAgAHMAbwBtAGUAIABwAHIAbwB0AG8AYwBvAGwAcwAgAGkAbgAgAHQAaABlACAAZAByAGkAbgBrAHMAIABjAGgAYQByAHQAZQByAA== x-cr-puzzleid: {C0C6D962-0CFB-43AD-8070-CBFC9512E1ED} Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:12:08 -0700 Message-ID: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter Thread-Index: Acp/RHJ42aFYMg/aRnisU6K6VvAbPA== From: "Jean-Francois Mule" To: "IETF DRINKS WG" X-Approved: ondar Subject: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:12:32 -0000 This is my view of why there is a need for protocols that some entities can use to provision data into registries that are deployed and in use today for billions of transactions in SMS-MMS, VoIP and other applications. In DRINKS, I thought we had a consensus on the way to view the use cases: a) operator to registry provisioning b) registry to downstream caching servers used for LUF resolution (sometimes called ENUM servers), with optionally LRF resolution for the sub-set of folks that think this is important c) registry to registry exchanges One view of the world says: we don't need all this, let's use DNS and zone file transfers, we will be done. This certainly works in some contexts. Another view based on real deployments and running code says: there are many entities that rely on those registries for real-time communications over IP today in wireless, wireline, enterprises. In both Dublin and Stockholm, we had folks from several registry companies and "resolution server" companies express support and views inline with this. Then we described use cases and requirements, got some requirements on the data modeling and the protocol options. We have several examples of registry communications based a) b) and c), sometimes across registries. Ok, work did not happen between August and November. But does that mean we are ready to say: nobody needs this work done? Jean-Francois. From dguyton@telcordia.com Thu Dec 17 11:47:04 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4949628C162 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:47:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4RAsT0gxXrA7 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:47:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from dnsmx1rrc.telcordia.com (dnsmx1rrc.telcordia.com [128.96.20.41]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73CD828C151 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:47:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from pya-dte-ieg01.dte.telcordia.com (pya-dte-ieg01.cc.telcordia.com [128.96.20.21]) by dnsmx1rrc.telcordia.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nBHJkmbA013299 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:46:48 -0500 (EST) X-AuditID: 80601415-000010cc0000054c-5e-4b2a8aa41fca Received: from pya-dte-exhb1.dte.telcordia.com ([128.96.20.11]) by pya-dte-ieg01.dte.telcordia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:46:44 -0500 Received: from rrc-dte-exmb2.dte.telcordia.com ([128.96.180.27]) by pya-dte-exhb1.dte.telcordia.com ([128.96.20.11]) with mapi; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:46:45 -0500 From: "Guyton, Deborah A" To: IETF DRINKS WG Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:46:44 -0500 Thread-Topic: DRINKS activity and milestones Thread-Index: Acp/RHJ42aFYMg/aRnisU6K6VvAbPAAC3FDw Message-ID: References: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Subject: [drinks] DRINKS activity and milestones X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:47:04 -0000 I'd like to express support to continue the work on defining some standards= for provisioning registries and then interfaces for distribution of the in= formation to address servers to support IP calls and other services. A number of us have been working on this for over a year through contribut= ions, the requirements design team, and then the protocol design team. I un= derstand that there are potentially a number of different architectures out= there and not all carriers are moving ahead as fast as anticipated due to = other higher priority items. However, we began this work as initial implem= entations are happening and being planned and we are anticipating the need = that will exist soon. I believe a lot of good work has been done. There is always room for additi= onal contributions and adjustments to move us toward some standards we coul= d begin with. Perhaps with initial implementations, these may need to be r= evisited, or updated. But I believe there are a few basis concepts we can a= gree on and define some initial standards. I think we hit a bump in the road when so many of us could not attend the = meeting in Hiroshima. Perhaps it will be easier to get to Anaheim. Maybe = we should have a virtual meeting, agree on updated milestones, decide on so= me basics on direction, and get the work moving again. My thoughts, Debbie Guyton From mmaharishi@tnsi.com Fri Dec 18 10:42:49 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5BBD3A68F1 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:42:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y+n+aSrlOmax for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:42:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnsi.com (relayus.tnsi.com [208.224.248.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7AAE3A68EA for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:42:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ([172.17.7.231]) by relayus.tnsi.com with ESMTP with TLS id 4440551.38594804; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:47:27 -0500 Received: from TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com ([172.17.7.214]) by MAIL-HUB-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com ([172.17.7.231]) with mapi; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:42:23 -0500 From: "Maharishi, Manjul" To: Jean-Francois Mule , IETF DRINKS WG Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:42:22 -0500 Thread-Topic: The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter Thread-Index: Acp/RHJ42aFYMg/aRnisU6K6VvAbPAAzGVvQ Message-ID: <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA091A58B7BB@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> References: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:42:49 -0000 I echo these remarks, and Debbie's comments from yesterday. I also would like to express support for continuing this effort, and we are= already having several scenarios and use cases which would benefit from st= andardized interface across the industry. We had made some good progress, and it will be a pity if that was just left= to rot/die. Agreed that there were some conflicting views, but that is und= erstandable. Manjul -----Original Message----- From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Jean-Francois Mule Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 1:12 PM To: IETF DRINKS WG Subject: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter This is my view of why there is a need for protocols that some entities can= use to provision data into registries that are deployed and in use today f= or billions of transactions in SMS-MMS, VoIP and other applications. In DRINKS, I thought we had a consensus on the way to view the use cases: a) operator to registry provisioning b) registry to downstream caching servers used for LUF resolution (= sometimes called ENUM servers), with optionally LRF resolution for the sub-= set of folks that think this is important c) registry to registry exchanges One view of the world says: we don't need all this, let's use DNS and zone = file transfers, we will be done. This certainly works in some contexts. Another view based on real deployments and running code says: there are man= y entities that rely on those registries for real-time communications over = IP today in wireless, wireline, enterprises. In both Dublin and Stockholm,= we had folks from several registry companies and "resolution server" compa= nies express support and views inline with this. Then we described use cases and requirements, got some requirements on the = data modeling and the protocol options. We have several examples of registry communications based a) b) and c), som= etimes across registries. Ok, work did not happen between August and November. But does that mean we = are ready to say: nobody needs this work done? Jean-Francois. _______________________________________________ drinks mailing list drinks@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information of Transaction Network Serv= ices. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If = you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail a= nd destroy all copies of the original message. From richard@shockey.us Fri Dec 18 13:50:12 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC3453A67F3 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:50:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.658 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.658 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.607, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yVuWTF7xBBox for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:50:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from outbound-mail-311.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-311.bluehost.com [67.222.54.4]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 750383A68B6 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:50:11 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 21884 invoked by uid 0); 18 Dec 2009 21:49:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy6.bluehost.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2009 21:49:56 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language:X-Identified-User; b=TDwdso9OfCse81ioCqqjUSITOU7+PQl3my7PREcXXrYqYFvMZIihHMWYUCe8RKCuUhRjgn8or3o78Cl1kdLrzH+HEv824mWHfzh2cI82gpuorJ0kB9ZNyInjf2MIKPUl; Received: from pool-96-241-233-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([96.241.233.91] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NLkhw-0002o7-Ht for drinks@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:49:56 -0700 From: "Richard Shockey" To: "'IETF DRINKS WG'" References: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA091A58B7BB@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> In-Reply-To: <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA091A58B7BB@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:49:52 -0500 Message-ID: <01a601ca802c$0820bcc0$18623640$@us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acp/RHJ42aFYMg/aRnisU6K6VvAbPAAzGVvQAAai1/A= Content-Language: en-us X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 96.241.233.91 authed with richard+shockey.us} Subject: Re: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:50:12 -0000 So what is the plan to progress the work? What milestones are people willing to agree to? What documents and when? The fact that we did not meet in Hiroshima is irrelevant. All work in the IETF is ultimately done on the list meetings are "opportunities" to resolve issues. > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Maharishi, Manjul > Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 1:42 PM > To: Jean-Francois Mule; IETF DRINKS WG > Subject: Re: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks > charter > > I echo these remarks, and Debbie's comments from yesterday. > > I also would like to express support for continuing this effort, and > we are already having several scenarios and use cases which would > benefit from standardized interface across the industry. > > We had made some good progress, and it will be a pity if that was just > left to rot/die. Agreed that there were some conflicting views, but > that is understandable. > > > Manjul > > > -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mule > Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 1:12 PM > To: IETF DRINKS WG > Subject: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter > > This is my view of why there is a need for protocols that some > entities can use to provision data into registries that are deployed > and in use today for billions of transactions in SMS-MMS, VoIP and > other applications. > > In DRINKS, I thought we had a consensus on the way to view the use > cases: > a) operator to registry provisioning > b) registry to downstream caching servers used for LUF > resolution (sometimes called ENUM servers), with optionally LRF > resolution for the sub-set of folks that think this is important > c) registry to registry exchanges > > One view of the world says: we don't need all this, let's use DNS and > zone file transfers, we will be done. This certainly works in some > contexts. > Another view based on real deployments and running code says: there > are many entities that rely on those registries for real-time > communications over IP today in wireless, wireline, enterprises. In > both Dublin and Stockholm, we had folks from several registry > companies and "resolution server" companies express support and views > inline with this. > > Then we described use cases and requirements, got some requirements on > the data modeling and the protocol options. > We have several examples of registry communications based a) b) and > c), sometimes across registries. > > Ok, work did not happen between August and November. But does that > mean we are ready to say: nobody needs this work done? > > Jean-Francois. > > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks > > This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s)and may > contain confidential and privileged information of Transaction Network > Services. > Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is > prohibited. If you > are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e- > mail and destroy all copies of the original message. > > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From kcartwright@tnsi.com Fri Dec 18 14:10:41 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7908D3A69CF for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:10:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.855 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3zp-6WAeCzyG for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:10:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnsi.com (relayus.tnsi.com [208.224.248.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9DAF3A6832 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:10:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from ([172.17.7.231]) by relayus.tnsi.com with ESMTP with TLS id 4440551.38600871; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:15:13 -0500 Received: from TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com ([172.17.7.214]) by MAIL-HUB-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com ([172.17.7.231]) with mapi; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:10:09 -0500 From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" To: "Maharishi, Manjul" , Jean-Francois Mule , IETF DRINKS WG Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:10:06 -0500 Thread-Topic: The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter Thread-Index: Acp/RHJ42aFYMg/aRnisU6K6VvAbPAAzGVvQAAc0eUA= Message-ID: <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA091A58B989@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> References: <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EF9F@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA091A58B7BB@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> In-Reply-To: <754963199212404AB8E9CFCA6C3D0CDA091A58B7BB@TNS-MAIL-NA.win2k.corp.tnsi.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:10:41 -0000 Right, the industry continues to progress forward, with more and more examp= les of inter-registry/inter-organization/inter-dataSource data exchanges, e= ach of which having its own protocol, and its own scheme for identifying th= e addresses responsible/owning organization and/or the AOR (LUF), and its o= wn scheme for identifying the route(s) to reach that responsible organizati= on or AOR (LRF), etc. This results in (and has resulted in) a series of on= e-off integrations being required between all of these registries/organizat= ions/dataSources. So standardization in this area is needed. Sorry for the lack of progress over the past few months, but other prioriti= es have temporarily won out. Ken -----Original Message----- From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Maharishi, Manjul Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 1:42 PM To: Jean-Francois Mule; IETF DRINKS WG Subject: Re: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter I echo these remarks, and Debbie's comments from yesterday. I also would like to express support for continuing this effort, and we are= already having several scenarios and use cases which would benefit from st= andardized interface across the industry. We had made some good progress, and it will be a pity if that was just left= to rot/die. Agreed that there were some conflicting views, but that is und= erstandable. Manjul -----Original Message----- From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Jean-Francois Mule Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 1:12 PM To: IETF DRINKS WG Subject: [drinks] The needs for some protocols in the drinks charter This is my view of why there is a need for protocols that some entities can= use to provision data into registries that are deployed and in use today f= or billions of transactions in SMS-MMS, VoIP and other applications. In DRINKS, I thought we had a consensus on the way to view the use cases: a) operator to registry provisioning b) registry to downstream caching servers used for LUF resolution (= sometimes called ENUM servers), with optionally LRF resolution for the sub-= set of folks that think this is important c) registry to registry exchanges One view of the world says: we don't need all this, let's use DNS and zone = file transfers, we will be done. This certainly works in some contexts. Another view based on real deployments and running code says: there are man= y entities that rely on those registries for real-time communications over = IP today in wireless, wireline, enterprises. In both Dublin and Stockholm,= we had folks from several registry companies and "resolution server" compa= nies express support and views inline with this. Then we described use cases and requirements, got some requirements on the = data modeling and the protocol options. We have several examples of registry communications based a) b) and c), som= etimes across registries. Ok, work did not happen between August and November. But does that mean we = are ready to say: nobody needs this work done? Jean-Francois. _______________________________________________ drinks mailing list drinks@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information of Transaction Network Serv= ices. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If = you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail a= nd destroy all copies of the original message. _______________________________________________ drinks mailing list drinks@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information of Transaction Network Serv= ices. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If = you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail a= nd destroy all copies of the original message. From fluffy@cisco.com Sat Dec 19 07:51:03 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C12D3A6A11 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:51:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.572 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.993, BAYES_00=-2.599, LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT=2.02, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A+S7YWkDrNYO for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:51:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C503A6986 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:51:02 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEADyFLEurR7Ht/2dsb2JhbAC8XZZBhC4E X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,424,1257120000"; d="scan'208";a="452953725" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2009 15:50:47 +0000 Received: from [192.168.4.177] (rcdn-fluffy-8711.cisco.com [10.99.9.18]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBJFolVx011557 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:50:47 GMT From: Cullen Jennings Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:50:46 -0700 Message-Id: To: Drinks@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Subject: [drinks] Drinks: Dead, Alive, or just sleeping it off X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:51:03 -0000 RAI will probably end up chartering around 5 new WGs between the last = IETF meeting and the next one. Obviously it would be nice to close some = WGs too. Conditions change over time and people vote with their feet on = what they want to work on.=20 There is nothing wrong with shelving something that is no longer top = priority for people but there is not much use for working on a zombie = project that is not high enough priority to complete. I don't know if = that is the case for this work or not but it sort of looking that way. I = would hope that a WG like this would have at least 5 to 10 people = willing to but in at least 5 hours a month and a few others willing to = put in significantly more. It's sort of hard to imagine completing this = without at least that level of work. I realize that things come up and = some times nothing happens in a WG for a few months for whatever = reasons.=20 I'm happy to get any suggestions on what we should do with this WG but = here's my straw man plan from what I currently know. We watch and see if = multiple people are willing to put in the effort needed over the next = few months and we make significant progress between now and the next = meeting. And I don't mean a small burst of energy the week before the = draft deadline. I'm sure lots of people have good intentions of working = on this but if it does not actually make a high enough priority that = people do work on it, then I suggest we shelve the work until this = becomes top priority again and close the WG. No work would be lost, the = mailing list could remain open and drafts will continue to exist on the = web.=20 I've also considered if a charter with a greatly reduced scope to help = get something small done, then move on to something bigger. But if there = is zero energy to do work, it won't matter how small the charter is so = the reduced charter did not seem like it would help. Cullen From pp3129@att.com Thu Dec 17 11:15:59 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 279CE3A69E3 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:15:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0ku2rBB6i3zt for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:15:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail146.messagelabs.com (mail146.messagelabs.com [216.82.241.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688F33A69E5 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:15:56 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: pp3129@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-146.messagelabs.com!1261077338!21897307!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146] Received: (qmail 467 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2009 19:15:38 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-9.tower-146.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 17 Dec 2009 19:15:38 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBHJFYkm003408; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:15:34 -0500 Received: from gaalpa1msgusr7a.ugd.att.com (gaalpa1msgusr7a.ugd.att.com [135.53.26.15]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBHJFS0j003362; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:15:28 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:15:22 -0500 Message-ID: <35FE871E2B085542A35726420E29DA6B02FB9F52@gaalpa1msgusr7a.ugd.att.com> In-Reply-To: <26330DBF-0078-42C0-825E-D67B75C7B9E1@hxr.us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) Thread-Index: Acp+edWDj5pdp6MZSMmSQ9TPyzBsswA0f/iw References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at><010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> <26330DBF-0078-42C0-825E-D67B75C7B9E1@hxr.us> From: "PFAUTZ, PENN L (ATTCORP)" To: "Andrew Newton" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:04:54 -0800 Cc: IETF DRINKS WG Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:18:05 -0000 Andy: For the record, I too was one of the doubters as I stated a few times on the list.=20 Penn Pfautz AT&T Access Management +1-732-420-4962 -----Original Message----- From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Newton Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:02 PM To: Richard Shockey Cc: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; 'IETF DRINKS WG' Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) It is one thing to ask if this work has been overcome by events, but if we are asking about the scope of the protocol then the IETF/IESG did not do its job during the chartering of the group. I cam away from Stockholm thinking the working group had made a bunch of reasonable decisions. I didn't agree with all of them, but everything seemed reasonable and rational. If people are saying they don't like the direction this work is now taking, they speak now. -andy On Dec 16, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: > Chair hat off, > =20 > Alex has summed the issues up very well indeed. > =20 > I'm not going to be prescriptive and suggest which option I prefer, but I am concerned about the meta issue of "What is the demand for this protocol?". I'm certainly getting mixed private messages from the carriers on what they perceive is the real market for DRINKS etc. Is it SSP to Registry, Registry to Registry Internal provisioning of localized number translation databases ( aka IP-SCP's ) etc. > =20 > From a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal more about the use of SPID's or the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional mechanism to full URI based data exchanges. This is TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of Interconnection. In this scenario the actually URI for interconnection is masked and is ultimately a private bi-lateral exchange between consenting SSP which somewhat maps to the current business model. And as some of you have seen recently I'm very supportive of what Bernie is proposing to do with E2M metadata in ENUM. He's trying to form a WG through DISPATCH right now. > =20 > The other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile and landline) are in a world of financial hurt , ARPU continues to decline, CAPEX / R&D budgets are not what they used to be. The supplier community is not doing that great either. This may not be a high priority and realistically this protocol is directed towards carriers. > =20 > To be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the GSM mobile operators interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling to me since their stated IP interconnection strategy is based in part on the use of ENUM like databases. > =20 > " How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers into those databases?", I ask. I don't get an answer. > =20 > From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk > Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:22 AM > To: Alexander Mayrhofer > Cc: IETF DRINKS WG; drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey > Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) > =20 > Alex,=20 >=20 > Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are.=20 >=20 > I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was going, so I favour your '(b)' approach.=20 >=20 > On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back. The general intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness.=20 >=20 > Ray=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > drinks mailing list > drinks@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks _______________________________________________ drinks mailing list drinks@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/drinks From pp3129@att.com Thu Dec 17 11:23:00 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: drinks@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824873A69FE for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:22:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.488 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.488 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.110, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wPGniUEHl0ai for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:22:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail121.messagelabs.com (mail121.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E0B3A6829 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:22:40 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: pp3129@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-121.messagelabs.com!1261077743!26691267!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146] Received: (qmail 10296 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2009 19:22:23 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-2.tower-121.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 17 Dec 2009 19:22:23 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBHJMJse008035; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:22:19 -0500 Received: from gaalpa1msgusr7a.ugd.att.com (gaalpa1msgusr7a.ugd.att.com [135.53.26.15]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBHJMFVM007992; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:22:15 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CA7F4E.3FC17F1D" Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:22:16 -0500 Message-ID: <35FE871E2B085542A35726420E29DA6B02FB9F5C@gaalpa1msgusr7a.ugd.att.com> In-Reply-To: <010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) Thread-Index: Acp+Y4V+Pw9Kwbd+S7W9a/viV8b2+wADtsXwADbFKHA= References: <012501ca7aa6$33aa7790$9aff66b0$@us> <9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE45@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <014501ca7dbe$f969d000$ec3d7000$@us><9AAEDF491EF7CA48AB587781B8F5D7C60278EE6B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <019b01ca7dd2$afae2470$0f0a6d50$@us> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0101B@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> <010101ca7e75$9b97ca10$d2c75e30$@us> From: "PFAUTZ, PENN L (ATTCORP)" To: "Richard Shockey" , , "IETF DRINKS WG" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:05:04 -0800 Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) X-BeenThere: drinks@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DRINKS WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:23:00 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CA7F4E.3FC17F1D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Rich: One guess I would hazard as to GSM disinterest may be that their model doesn't put policy into the registry much as you describe in the third paragraph. From that perspective drinks is bound to seem a little overweight. =20 Penn Pfautz AT&T Access Management +1-732-420-4962 =20 ________________________________ From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard Shockey Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 12:32 PM To: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; 'IETF DRINKS WG' Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) Chair hat off, =20 Alex has summed the issues up very well indeed.=20 =20 I'm not going to be prescriptive and suggest which option I prefer, but I am concerned about the meta issue of "What is the demand for this protocol?". I'm certainly getting mixed private messages from the carriers on what they perceive is the real market for DRINKS etc. Is it SSP to Registry, Registry to Registry Internal provisioning of localized number translation databases ( aka IP-SCP's ) etc.=20 =20 >From a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal more about the use of SPID's or the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional mechanism to full URI based data exchanges. This is TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of Interconnection. In this scenario the actually URI for interconnection is masked and is ultimately a private bi-lateral exchange between consenting SSP which somewhat maps to the current business model. And as some of you have seen recently I'm very supportive of what Bernie is proposing to do with E2M metadata in ENUM. He's trying to form a WG through DISPATCH right now. =20 The other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile and landline) are in a world of financial hurt , ARPU continues to decline, CAPEX / R&D budgets are not what they used to be. The supplier community is not doing that great either. This may not be a high priority and realistically this protocol is directed towards carriers.=20 =20 To be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the GSM mobile operators interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling to me since their stated IP interconnection strategy is based in part on the use of ENUM like databases.=20 =20 " How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers into those databases?", I ask. I don't get an answer.=20 =20 From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:22 AM To: Alexander Mayrhofer Cc: IETF DRINKS WG; drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [drinks] Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?) =20 Alex,=20 Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we are.=20 I'm one of those who was unhappy with the direction the group was going, so I favour your '(b)' approach.=20 On the question of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to the mailing list some time back. The general intent was that the DG be relatively "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, but the draft also suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure global uniqueness.=20 Ray=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CA7F4E.3FC17F1D Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Rich:
One guess I would hazard as to GSM disinterest = may be that=20 their model doesn't put policy into the registry much as you describe in = the=20 third paragraph. From that perspective drinks is bound to seem a little=20 overweight.
 
Penn Pfautz
AT&T Access = Management
+1-732-420-4962
 

From: drinks-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard=20 Shockey
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 12:32 = PM
To:=20 Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; 'IETF DRINKS WG'
Subject: Re: = [drinks]=20 Options (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?)

Chair=20 hat off,

 

Alex=20 has summed the issues up very well indeed.

 

I’m=20 not going to be prescriptive and suggest which option I prefer, but I am = concerned about the meta issue of “What is the demand for this = protocol?”.=20  I’m certainly getting mixed private messages from the = carriers on what=20 they perceive is the real market for DRINKS etc.  Is it  SSP = to=20 Registry,  Registry to Registry Internal provisioning of localized = number=20 translation databases ( aka IP-SCP’s ) etc.

 

From=20 a purely routing perspective I hear a great deal more about the use of = SPID’s or=20 the proposed ITU G-SPID as a transitional mechanism to full URI based = data=20 exchanges. This is TN>SPID>Trunkgroup>Point of=20 Interconnection.   In this scenario the actually URI for=20 interconnection is masked and is ultimately a private bi-lateral = exchange=20 between consenting SSP which somewhat maps to the current business = model.=20   And as some of you have seen recently I’m very = supportive of what=20 Bernie is proposing to do with E2M metadata in ENUM. He’s trying = to form a WG=20 through DISPATCH right now.

 

The=20 other issue is that a lot of the carriers ( mobile and landline) are in = a world=20 of financial hurt , ARPU continues to decline, CAPEX / R&D budgets = are not=20 what they used to be.  The supplier community is not doing that = great=20 either. This may not be a high priority and realistically this protocol = is=20 directed towards carriers.

 

To=20 be even more blunt, I have not been able to get the GSM mobile operators = interested in DRINKS which is utterly baffling  to me since their = stated IP=20 interconnection strategy is based in part on the use of ENUM like = databases.=20

 

“=20 How, pray tell, do you propose to get the numbers into those = databases?”, I ask.=20 I don’t get an answer.

 

From:=20 drinks-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, = 2009 10:22=20 AM
To: Alexander Mayrhofer
Cc: IETF DRINKS WG;=20 drinks-bounces@ietf.org; Richard Shockey
Subject: Re: [drinks] = Options=20 (Was: Shutting down the DRINKS WG?)

 

Alex,

Thanks, that's a useful summary of where we=20 are.

I'm one of = those who=20 was unhappy with the direction the group was going, so I favour your = '(b)'=20 approach.

On the = question=20 of DG identifiers, don't forget that I posted an (incomplete) draft to = the=20 mailing list some time back.  The general intent was that the DG be = relatively "opaque", such that little meaning could be attached to it, = but the=20 draft also suggested that it be suffixed with a domain name to ensure = global=20 uniqueness.

Ray=20

------_=_NextPart_001_01CA7F4E.3FC17F1D--