From rjsparks@nostrum.com Mon Dec 6 12:51:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5BA83A6894; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 12:51:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.462 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.462 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.138, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 PTruTKR4Os80; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 12:51:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9B63A6893; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 12:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (pool-173-71-48-4.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.71.48.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oB6KqZHX043990 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:52:36 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) From: Robert Sparks Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:52:35 -0600 Message-Id: To: ecrit@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 173.71.48.4 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: rai@ietf.org Subject: [Ecrit] sponsoring draft-forte-lost-extensions X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 20:51:19 -0000 I've been asked to AD sponsor draft-forte-lost-extensions as an = individual submission for Informational and plan to take the document to IETF LC soon. I would like a few early = reviews, particularly from anyone who's commented on it on list before. If you are willing to review this document prior to IETF LC, please drop = me and the authors a note. RjS= From rjsparks@nostrum.com Mon Dec 6 14:48:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C83D28C0DC for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:48:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.478 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.122, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 nT61hc98zHpx for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:48:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176E928C0D6 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:48:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (pool-173-71-48-4.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.71.48.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oB6Mo08g052889 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 16:50:00 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Robert Sparks In-Reply-To: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAC59@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 16:50:00 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <963B9A52-176A-4F50-885D-13A22896617D@nostrum.com> References: , <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAB5B@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAC59@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> To: "Thomson, Martin" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 173.71.48.4 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: "Worley, Dale R \(Dale\)" , "ecrit@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Erratum report on erratum 2511 to RFC 5222 (LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol) X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 22:48:40 -0000 This sounds like "Hold For Document Update" then? RjS On Nov 24, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote: > On 2010-11-25 at 01:35:58, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote: >> Unfortunately, I think this problem is beyond "errata" but rather is = an >> inconsistency in the design, and there is no clearly correct >> resolution. Hence my desire to return it to the WG. >=20 > I can't argue with that. We definitely need to discuss this further. = Probably discuss along with the resolution to the GEOPRIV question. >=20 > --Martin >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ecrit mailing list > Ecrit@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit From br@brianrosen.net Mon Dec 6 15:09:04 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1999728C0CF for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:09:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.425 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.425 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.174, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, 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 XlRA0oZAcawN for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:09:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from barmail3.idig.net (barmail3.idig.net [64.34.111.253]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E41003A68CD for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:09:02 -0800 (PST) X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1291677026-0c81c1d50001-uVEBo8 Received: from wwh1.winweblinux.com (wwh1.winweblinux.com [76.74.186.184]) by barmail3.idig.net with ESMTP id Rf0dplILdD9zOVQH; Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:10:26 -0800 (PST) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: br@brianrosen.net X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 76.74.186.184 Received: from [209.173.57.233] (helo=[192.168.130.59]) by wwh1.winweblinux.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PPkCQ-0006wG-Qz; Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:10:27 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [Ecrit] Erratum report on erratum 2511 to RFC 5222 (LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Brian Rosen In-Reply-To: <963B9A52-176A-4F50-885D-13A22896617D@nostrum.com> Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 18:09:12 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: , <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAB5B@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAC59@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <963B9A52-176A-4F50-885D-13A22896617D@nostrum.com> To: Robert Sparks X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-Barracuda-Connect: wwh1.winweblinux.com[76.74.186.184] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1291677026 X-Barracuda-URL: http://64.34.111.253:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at idig.net X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.5 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.48676 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Cc: "Worley, Dale R \(Dale\)" , "ecrit@ietf.org" , "Thomson, Martin" Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Erratum report on erratum 2511 to RFC 5222 (LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol) X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 23:09:04 -0000 Sorry, hold what? This is an erratum to an erratum. Can you hold an erratum? We're probably going to need an update to 5222. Not sure which document = will do that, but I agree with Martin that whatever we do with = "local-civic", this issue fits into that discussion. We do need to discuss and agree on a solution, and then write text. But = right now, I don't think there is anything to hold, is there? Brian On Dec 6, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > This sounds like "Hold For Document Update" then? >=20 > RjS >=20 > On Nov 24, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote: >=20 >> On 2010-11-25 at 01:35:58, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote: >>> Unfortunately, I think this problem is beyond "errata" but rather is = an >>> inconsistency in the design, and there is no clearly correct >>> resolution. Hence my desire to return it to the WG. >>=20 >> I can't argue with that. We definitely need to discuss this further. = Probably discuss along with the resolution to the GEOPRIV question. >>=20 >> --Martin >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ecrit mailing list >> Ecrit@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Ecrit mailing list > Ecrit@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit From rjsparks@nostrum.com Mon Dec 6 15:14:43 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDD8628C0E5 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:14:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.452 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.452 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 R8tAwbk2+Mv8 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:14:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE9028C0E2 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:14:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (pool-173-71-48-4.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.71.48.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oB6NG2F6054951 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:16:02 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Robert Sparks In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 17:16:02 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: , <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAB5B@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAC59@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <963B9A52-176A-4F50-885D-13A22896617D@nostrum.com> To: Brian Rosen X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 173.71.48.4 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: "Worley, Dale R \(Dale\)" , "ecrit@ietf.org" , "Thomson, Martin" Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Erratum report on erratum 2511 to RFC 5222 (LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol) X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 23:14:44 -0000 Hold for Document Update is one of the states we can resolve a reported = erratum into. Hold for Document Update - The erratum is not a necessary update to the = RFC. However, any future update of the document might consider this = erratum, and determine whether it is correct and merits including in the = update.=20 See for more = information. To be a little more verbose about what I sent before, what I'm hearing = is that errata 2511 should resolve to "Hold for Document Update" and we'll be figuring out separately what document does that updating. RjS On Dec 6, 2010, at 5:09 PM, Brian Rosen wrote: > Sorry, hold what? >=20 > This is an erratum to an erratum. Can you hold an erratum? >=20 > We're probably going to need an update to 5222. Not sure which = document will do that, but I agree with Martin that whatever we do with = "local-civic", this issue fits into that discussion. >=20 > We do need to discuss and agree on a solution, and then write text. = But right now, I don't think there is anything to hold, is there? >=20 > Brian >=20 >=20 > On Dec 6, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: >=20 >> This sounds like "Hold For Document Update" then? >>=20 >> RjS >>=20 >> On Nov 24, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote: >>=20 >>> On 2010-11-25 at 01:35:58, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote: >>>> Unfortunately, I think this problem is beyond "errata" but rather = is an >>>> inconsistency in the design, and there is no clearly correct >>>> resolution. Hence my desire to return it to the WG. >>>=20 >>> I can't argue with that. We definitely need to discuss this = further. Probably discuss along with the resolution to the GEOPRIV = question. >>>=20 >>> --Martin >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ecrit mailing list >>> Ecrit@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ecrit mailing list >> Ecrit@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >=20 From christer.holmberg@ericsson.com Mon Dec 6 23:24:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4673A6923 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 23:24:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.439 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.160, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 6zItR9GRTPxb for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 23:24:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2AE3A672E for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 23:24:09 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7ceeae0000031e4-6e-4cfde16d6e34 Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 80.5D.12772.D61EDFC4; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:25:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.175]) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.87]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:25:33 +0100 From: Christer Holmberg To: 'Hannes Tschofenig' , "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:25:33 +0100 Thread-Topic: [Ecrit] PSAP Callback: Pending Draft Update - Feedback needed! Thread-Index: AcuMl4O2LIl+14bXRayw9ConxyKp9AJSFd0g Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A058502B8407A@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05850307D245@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05850307D293@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: 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== Cc: Hannes Tschofenig , ECRIT Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PSAP Callback: Pending Draft Update - Feedback needed! X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 07:24:11 -0000 Hi, Was there some outcome of this discussion? Regards, Christer=20 -----Original Message----- From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net]=20 Sent: 25. marraskuuta 2010 13:54 To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg; Hannes Tschofenig; E= CRIT Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PSAP Callback: Pending Draft Update - Feedback needed! I understand the desire to have that use cases covered.=20 I was interested to hear more about the desire properties because there are= security implications that we may not want to ignore.=20 The implication I see that it is difficult for the PSTN-IP gateway to decid= e whether an outgoing call is a callback or not.=20 I am curious to hear whether there are mechanisms on the PSTN side that wou= ld allow such "callback marking" to be signaled to the gateway.=20 On Nov 25, 2010, at 5:01 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote: > Surely the IETF work is to enable the original user with an emergency to = be IP connected.=20 >=20 > Giving the caller the benifit of the callback experience should be possib= le whether the PSAP is IP connected or connected via the PSTN. In many coun= tries we expect to see PSAPs connected via the PSTN for a long time, while = the users are increasingly IP connected. >=20 > Therefore whether the PSAP is IP connected or connected via the PSTN shou= ld not affect the way callbacks occur to that user. Whether there are techn= ical problems with providing a solution or not, the use case is equally val= id. >=20 > regards >=20 > Keith >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ecrit-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 >> Behalf Of Brian Rosen >> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:06 PM >> To: Christer Holmberg >> Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; Hannes Tschofenig; ECRIT >> Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PSAP Callback: Pending Draft Update - Feedback=20 >> needed! >>=20 >> In every nation I know the details of (which isn't many), the PSTN=20 >> affords no special processing to call backs. >>=20 >> Having the gateway aware that a call was a call back is not useful in=20 >> those countries. >>=20 >> Brian >>=20 >> On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:48 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote: >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Hi, >>>=20 >>>> What are the properties of the design in the PSTN case? >>>>=20 >>>> Based on what information is the PSTN-VoIP gateway going to put a=20 >>>> callback marking on the call? >>>=20 >>> Unfortunately I don't have details of that available. I >> think the information elements have different names depending on=20 >> countries etc. >>>=20 >>> And, as I said, if no such information element is >> available, number analysis can be used. >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>>=20 >>> Christer >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ecrit mailing list >>> Ecrit@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ecrit mailing list >> Ecrit@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >>=20 From dworley@avaya.com Tue Dec 7 08:28:17 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15B93A6823 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:28:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.504 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.504 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.095, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 QXK0v09Imm0E for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:28:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282943A69A0 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 08:28:16 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAJvv/UyHCzI1/2dsb2JhbACjQnGnXwKZUIVJBIRiiTw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,311,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="222040234" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2010 11:29:41 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,311,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="552617948" Received: from dc-us1hcex1.us1.avaya.com (HELO DC-US1HCEX1.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.20]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2010 11:29:40 -0500 Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([169.254.1.90]) by DC-US1HCEX1.global.avaya.com ([2002:870b:3414::870b:3414]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 11:29:39 -0500 From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" To: Robert Sparks , "Thomson, Martin" Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 11:29:39 -0500 Thread-Topic: [Ecrit] Erratum report on erratum 2511 to RFC 5222 (LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol) Thread-Index: AcuVl+0QYeNGecS3TR2b33wNSe/u3AAk0ulg Message-ID: References: , <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAB5B@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F33EAC59@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>, <963B9A52-176A-4F50-885D-13A22896617D@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <963B9A52-176A-4F50-885D-13A22896617D@nostrum.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 Cc: "ecrit@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Erratum report on erratum 2511 to RFC 5222 (LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol) X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 16:28:17 -0000 First, my erratum report needs to be edited to fix an error Martin pointed = out. The text > But the schema in the RFC explicitly says that the elements > are QNames. Now that latter may be an error (and the schema is > labeled non-normative), and also all LocalParts are QNames. should be changed to: > But the schema in the RFC (section 15) explicitly says that the > elements are QNames. Now all LocalParts are QNames. In regard to how to classify the erratum, I consider "Hold for document upd= ate" to mean that the erratum is not necessary input for someone who wants = to implement the RFC and so the erratum can be archived until the document = is revised for some other reason. But in this case, the erratum is a warni= ng of an implementation pitfall, a pitfall whose resolution is not at all c= lear. So I would classify it as "Verified", not in the sense of "this is a= necessary correction to the text of the RFC" but in the sense of "this is = a necessary warning to implementers". Though that is just my opinion, and it may not align with the established u= se of these categories. Dale From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Thu Dec 16 01:15:02 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E78813A70B8; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:15:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.527 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.527 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.072, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 D0x9CYejk3H5; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:15:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1077E3A7091; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:15:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.10 Message-ID: <20101216091502.19751.78772.idtracker@localhost> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:15:02 -0800 Cc: ecrit@ietf.org Subject: [Ecrit] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-05.txt X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 09:15:03 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies Working Group of the IETF. Title : LoST Service List Boundary Extension Author(s) : K. Wolf Filename : draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-05.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2010-12-16 LoST maps service identifiers and location information to service contact URIs. If a LoST client wants to discover available services for a particular location, it will perform a query to the LoST server. However, the LoST server, in its response, does not provide context information, that is, it does not provide any additional information about the geographical region for which the returned list of services is considered valid within. Therefore, this document proposes a Service List Boundary that returns a local context along with the list of services returned, in order to assist the client to not miss a change in available services when moving. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-05.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-05.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2010-12-16010649.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From khwolf1@gmail.com Thu Dec 16 01:18:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A55C53A70AA for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:18:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 a3lKmeM6mV9K for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:18:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72AC3A70BE for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:18:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by iwn40 with SMTP id 40so3392812iwn.31 for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:20:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OaiZTjS3gdv1ASHaroek5GrbwhWbuyHAK2RYdaoLa+U=; b=FabhNiC7L0rDF2T9kMnOpwMtJ34nL8dhh6+M0b8K8PsGvaPF4Wm11b3erLAjn3JM/C +RYygUaviqyjt8Wv7oyUcMXGxoookJ3oHLhw0PDmdhRucLyJn8aCMSsNaTIZ9YdPqPcs PtyHoA9msS1L77fC8UlBP8kvlfaODMpnYpVj0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=slXj8iqCD5zYnHRpASO3q69frFEMGLGzgZ/MeYxlajvGd/2ew6m0Uz8SADMQD1yeS8 /lZEHlNJpXuYLH1/oRd81dtKrCvSu16cOitOaEms3hTtmGjGj5bdFNFKwNX2LqmS4yPY bWJGWrEpKrw1m/rMPrpCprj6JHSQyZSBqDafQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.37.69 with SMTP id w5mr5858555ibd.102.1292491227631; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:20:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.59.81 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:20:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20101216091502.19751.78772.idtracker@localhost> References: <20101216091502.19751.78772.idtracker@localhost> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:20:27 +0100 Message-ID: From: Karl Heinz Wolf To: ecrit@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Ecrit] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-05.txt X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 09:18:44 -0000 this revision addresses the last call comments by Robert. karl heinz On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:15 AM, wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direct= ories. > This draft is a work item of the Emergency Context Resolution with Intern= et Technologies Working Group of the IETF. > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : LoST Service List Boundary Ext= ension > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : K. Wolf > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelis= tboundary-05.txt > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 16 > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2010-12-16 > > LoST maps service identifiers and location information to service > contact URIs. =A0If a LoST client wants to discover available services > for a particular location, it will perform a > query to the LoST server. =A0However, the LoST server, in its response, > does not provide context information, that is, it does not provide > any additional information about the geographical region for which > the returned list of services is considered valid within. =A0Therefore, > this document proposes a Service List Boundary that returns a local > context along with the list of services returned, in order to assist > the client to not miss a change in available services when moving. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboun= dary-05.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > > > _______________________________________________ > Ecrit mailing list > Ecrit@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit > > From hgs@cs.columbia.edu Tue Dec 21 14:12:07 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09C943A68A6 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:12:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, 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 2Olf21KAYFsx for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:12:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from serrano.cc.columbia.edu (serrano.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD4773A69D1 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:12:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaddock.cc.columbia.edu (shaddock.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.28.109]) by serrano.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oBLME0mo005482; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:14:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from shaddock.cc.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shaddock.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oBLME0LO005033; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:14:00 -0500 (EST) Received: (from www@localhost) by shaddock.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.13.0/Submit) id oBLME0RL005032; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:14:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from 208.23.64.14 ([208.23.64.14]) by cubmail.cc.columbia.edu (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:14:00 -0500 Message-ID: <20101221171400.rm6f0t660wkcw44s@cubmail.cc.columbia.edu> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:14:00 -0500 From: Henning Schulzrinne To: ECRIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.6) X-CubMail-Sender: hgs10@columbia.edu X-No-Spam-Score: Local X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.6 Cc: henning.schulzrinne@fcc.gov Subject: [Ecrit] FCC Notice of Inquiry X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 22:12:07 -0000 The FCC has posted a notice of inquiry (NOI) related to NG911 issues, including multiple media, standardization, location determination, network infrastructure and transition issues, among others. The document is at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-200A1.pdf and the comment period ends 45 days after publication in the Federal Register. Technical comments are appreciated and all comments can easily be filed as a PDF file via the FCC ECFS web site. Henning (wearing my FCC hat) From hgs@cs.columbia.edu Wed Dec 22 05:32:42 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A33D3A6B61 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:32:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 Hqon1Sh1VGfr for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:32:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from serrano.cc.columbia.edu (serrano.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64A593A6877 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:32:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (pool-74-96-52-58.washdc.east.verizon.net [74.96.52.58]) (user=hgs10 mech=PLAIN bits=0) by serrano.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oBMDYbgr002469 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:34:38 -0500 (EST) From: Henning Schulzrinne Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:34:37 -0500 Message-Id: <7F5FAEC5-12E6-40A9-9DC1-E1883DF693BA@cs.columbia.edu> To: ECRIT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-No-Spam-Score: Local X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.6 Subject: [Ecrit] Updated FCC NOI link X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 13:32:42 -0000 Some have reported problems with the link I posted yesterday; the link = below seems to work = http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1221/FCC-10-200A1.= pdf From shida@ntt-at.com Fri Dec 31 03:24:23 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB21F28C0F0 for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 03:24:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, 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 iRjKsY9V0mKx for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 03:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from gateway14.websitewelcome.com (gateway14.websitewelcome.com [69.93.154.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7039128B23E for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 03:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 2536 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2010 11:28:37 -0000 Received: from gator465.hostgator.com (69.56.174.130) by gateway14.websitewelcome.com with SMTP; 31 Dec 2010 11:28:37 -0000 Received: from [124.81.255.50] (port=49368 helo=[172.10.10.89]) by gator465.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PYd7q-0002Nr-K8; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 05:26:27 -0600 From: Shida Schubert Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 19:26:29 +0800 Message-Id: To: rai@ietf.org, ecrit@ietf.org, Henning Schulzrinne , Andrea G Forte , Marc Linsner , Richard Barnes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator465.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ntt-at.com Subject: [Ecrit] RAI-ART review for draft-forte-lost-extensions-02.txt X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 11:24:23 -0000 I am the assigned RAI-ART reviewer for = draft-forte-lost-extensions-02.txt. For background on RAI-ART, please see the FAQ at = . Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you may = receive. *** This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should = be fixed before publication. *** I am sending the nits to the authors so I am sending few technical = concerns I have on the lists. ** Comments on the draft ** 0. This draft alters a definition of region for non-emergency = services, should this be=20 updating the RFC5222 in anyway? I am not sure if it should as = emergency case=20 is obviously the main user of the protocol but will this be the = case, say in 5 years?=20 1. Looking at the definition of "query" in RFC5222, the draft is not = really defining=20 a new queries but defining a filter to limit the results. I don't = feel that term =20 "queries" for this extension defined in this draft is appropriate. I = apologize for not being=20 able to come up with a proposal but "query" just didn't sound = right..=20 2. The draft clearly states that these extensions are NOT applicable to = the=20 emergency uses. If that is the case the draft should probably say = that it MUST NOT be=20 used in emergency cases somewhere in the draft, especially if it = has negative=20 implication (I couldn't think of any but..).=20 3. is used when you want to query the LoST server to find a = service=20 that serves the requesting entity's location but default behavior = of LoST as=20 defined in RFC5222 is to conduct a query based on the region so = this seems=20 tad bit odd to me. Especially because when is absent, one = is supposed=20 to conduct a search based on the distance from the user but it = should be the=20 other way around. Either say that when is absent it is = assumed true=20 or define alternative element which describes that it's for doing a = "instance within=20 X distance". ** General comments about the use of LoST for service other than = emergency ** I think this draft highlights lack of consideration during the creation = of LoST generic uses=20 beside emergency services and this raises some concerns not necessary = with this draft=20 but with the generic use of LoST in general.=20 1. When LoST server is used for generic uses, I believe the server will = be stressed a lot=20 more than when used for Emergency cases due to unique computation = required for=20 querying users's location to service region of the service or = searching for services=20 within distance X. I just hope that encouraging=20 the use of LoST for generic uses will not interfere with the = Emergency service in anyway..=20 I am assuming that in real deployment, the LoST server that handles = the initial request=20 will probably dispatch or redirect the request to appropriate server = that can handle the=20 requested service, so LoST serve that will handle the mapping of = location to PSAP will=20 not be overwhelmed by trying to figure out what pizza delivery is = close to Joe's current=20 location.=20 2. Although, I am assuming most or all of the remaining queries will = function as=20 defined in RFC5222, I think we should probably look at how the rest = of the=20 query beside will look like and behave when used for = generic uses.=20 e.g.=20 How useful is the listservice / listserviceresponse in generic uses = as is now?=20 >> Should there be an extension to query with a filter so=20= only a sub-element will be displayed (querying the LoST = server with=20 urn:service:restaurants or urn:service:stores? =20 This has nothing to do with the draft in question.. But something we = may want to=20 think about if we are going to encourage people to implement LoST for = non-emergency services. Regards Shida=