Subject: [Ecrit] IETF85 - Atlanta: ECRIT Minutes for 11/08/2012

From: Roger Marshall <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 23:34:15 +0000

Minutes - ECRIT - IETF85, Atlanta

Summary

1. Another revision to milestone dates will be posted, based on comments
received in the working group meeting. It was agreed that a couple of
milestone dates should be pulled in.

2. Brian Rosen agreed to update draft-ietf-ecrit-data-only-ea based on
a quick review from Randy Gellens.  ECRIT chairs agreed to submit
draft-ietf-ecrit-data-only-ea for WGLC following above version update
(done 11/09/2012).

3. Richard Barnes to draft a letter outlining two possible solutions, for
Out of Jurisdiction Emergency Routing and rough-locaion draft, listing +/-'s,
with the intention to send it to ETSI as a contribution.

4. Individual ECRIT draft status as discussed in the meeting is available
per Jean's well-captured notes below.

-roger marshall.

ECRIT Notes based on agenda at:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/85/agenda/agenda-85-ecrit.txt

Chairs: Marc Linsner, Roger Marshall

Thursday, 13:00-15:00

Raw Notes from A. Jean Mahoney, <[email-masked]>
-----------------------------------------------------
 My notes are attached. Highlights below:
 WG Milestones:
 * draft-ietf-ecrit-data-only-ea - Brian will release a new draft.
   Randy can review it. Should be ready for wglc soon.
* draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp - MISSREF issue has been resolved.
* draft-ietf-ecrit-psap-callback - milestone should come before the
   trustworthy-location.
* draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data - milestone can be moved up, new
   version out soon and ready for wglc.

 Trustworthy location information
 * Clarify what "trustworthy" and "untrustworthy" mean.
* Add more architecture info to section 2.
* Expand discussion of bounding error (aka sanity check)
* Improve the description of audit.
* Cut section 5 to solution analysis only.
* Describe that you don't know if headers are added by trusted proxies.
* Abstract marking versus policy.

 PSAP Callbacks
 * The objection to the header field was retracted.
* Read draft-roach-sipcore-priority - issues should be taken to the
   sipcore mailing list.

 Policy for defining new service-identifying labels
 * Should make this as quick and easy as possible using expert review
   rather than RFC.
* Create a document to help the expert reviewer.
* Provide guidance on how to use the registry
* 2 classifications - general public and top-level domains.

 Extensions to the Emergency Services Architecture for dealing with Unauthenticated and Unauthorized Devices
 * Access network provides either a SIP proxy or registrar (current
   clients don't do discovery)

 Out of Jurisdiction Emergency Routing
 * LoST servers are not necessarily there.
* Want the solution to be as close to LoST as possible to allow for
   interop and scalability.
* Two approaches were discussed.
* Present two approaches and their drawbacks to ETSI.
* Too much in common with rough-loc to send rough-loc to WGLC.

 Jean
 <ecrit_session_notes.txt>

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, any review, forwarding, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication or any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete it and all attachments from your computer and network.