From spencer@wonderhamster.org Fri Jan 29 05:21:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip-ops@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip-ops@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BF93A6A2C for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:21:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.346 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.346 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.252, BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] 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 h5Ga-SeKKVkd for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:21:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F733A6A22 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:21:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from S73602b (cpe-76-182-230-135.tx.res.rr.com [76.182.230.135]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lnghj-1OHMpL2Icp-00hs8b; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 08:22:11 -0500 Message-ID: <58921C257EA84F0A87C46634E5952A82@china.huawei.com> From: "Spencer Dawkins" To: References: <618e24240907030640k2898f908s450626af73dad5f8@mail.gmail.com><1248374452.4427.14.camel@victoria-pingtel-com.us.nortel.com> <618e24240907240734o78c758eds1578a27e9811ab00@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:21:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19n8zEy1+serlxeCK5b3UYI2TUIXs+U2XDIv97 f7QYSyZAXqVX81XBkiFtyYYV5X7uiEk37+Ed1q5QFpOuODzbGh Nqn+pC0STJTr812NHKDcX1PtNKOq9nMLnzzz6CiQtE= Cc: Bernard Aboba Subject: [sip-ops] Plea for SIP-OPS Clue - MARTINI X-BeenThere: sip-ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP Operations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:21:54 -0000 Dear SIP-OPS folk, Just a heads-up about an IETF effort that needs operator input... The MARTINI working group has been chartered to define an IETF standards-track mechanism for mass-registering SIP AORs for SIP PBXes. Typically, today this happens with a vanilla SIP REGISTER operation that gives no indication that additional AORs are being implicitly registered. Charter is at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/martini/charters. The working group is looking at a variety of proposals about how to do this, including switching to the use of PUBLISH, and we're seeing assertions that (for instance) SIP operators often drop all traffic that doesn't correspond to a REGISTER, so the PUBLISH would not be forwarded to the location service unless that filtering changes. We're also talking about whether we should do this only for tel: URIs, which would be a pretty big change. We are getting input from CableLabs on behalf of MSOs, but we're not getting input from other operators. If you care about this work, please take a look at the mailing list (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/martini/current/maillist.html), and then let us know (on the MARTINI mailing list) what you think. To Subscribe: martini-request at ietf.org In Body: subscribe Thanks, Spencer, as MARTINI co-chair From spencer@wonderhamster.org Fri Jan 29 05:32:47 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip-ops@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip-ops@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373AC3A67AD for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:32:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.362 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.362 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.237, 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 nXrmBskabaQ0 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:32:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A843A672E for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:32:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from S73602b (cpe-76-182-230-135.tx.res.rr.com [76.182.230.135]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus4) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lh70R-1O6K2g0lKZ-00oL78; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 08:33:07 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Spencer Dawkins" To: References: <618e24240907030640k2898f908s450626af73dad5f8@mail.gmail.com><1248374452.4427.14.camel@victoria-pingtel-com.us.nortel.com><618e24240907240734o78c758eds1578a27e9811ab00@mail.gmail.com> <58921C257EA84F0A87C46634E5952A82@china.huawei.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:32:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/WKDBjDD4oq++TQ5EVlwoFSYgPb9LE//XNwg/ zqIbi6k60TU7gF7qDDACjJg2r7YHJuIpWi1Di1XGQdFyEuWDC4 o6JtuFlrvT1Ox8webtPYoJd1nlM1f06T3IcevFJl4Q= Subject: [sip-ops] Plea for SIP-OPS Clue - SIPCLF X-BeenThere: sip-ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP Operations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:32:47 -0000 Dear SIP-OPS folk, The IETF SIPCLF working group has been chartered to develop a SIP Common Log Format, analogous to Apache CLF. Charter is at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sipclf/charters. As of this moment, that's the ONLY thing we're chartered to produce - so you could log onto a SIP box and "tail" or "grep" the logs, and kind of know what you'd expect to see, but considerations about correlating logs from multiple boxes, moving log entries to a management platform, etc. are out of scope. We're looking at a variety of approaches here, and Theo and I would like to have your input about what would really get used by SIP operators. For instance, we might use an IPFIX or SYSLOG format, to inherit infrastructure so that SIPCLF would just be part of the management infrastructure. We'd love to know what operators think! Please take a look at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf/current/maillist.html, and let us know what you think (on the SIPCLF mailing list, of course). Subscription information is at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf. We would also love to hear from you about the SIPCLF problem statement, currently in WGLC for adoption - it's at http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-gurbani-sipclf-problem-statement-01.txt. Thanks! Spencer, as SIPCLF co-chair