Subject: Draft Charter Update for review at meeting

From: James Rafferty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 17:33:45 -0500

Folks, 

One of our agenda items is to review updates to the charter.  

To aid the discussion, I've attached an updated draft charter.   Please review
if you can before the meeting.  Comments are welcome.  

James

Charter text follows:  

Internet Fax (fax)
------------------

 Chair(s):
     
     James Rafferty <[email-masked]>>

 Applications Area Director(s):
     Keith Moore  <[email-masked]>
     Patrik Fältström  <[email-masked]>

 Area Advisor
   Keith Moore  <[email-masked]>

 Mailing lists:
     General Discussion:[email-masked]
     To Subscribe:      [email-masked]
         In Body:       In Body: subscribe
     Archive:          
<http://www.imc.org/ietf-fax>http://www.imc.org/ietf-fax/

Description of Working Group:

Facsimile (fax) serves as a reliable, inexpensive global communications
service.  As the Internet becomes pervasive, integrating fax and
Internet services is appealing in terms of cost savings and
opportunities for functional enhancements. 

The overall goal of the fax working group is not to completely emulate all
features of Group 3 facsimile using Internet email, but to integrate the two
environments. To this end it will define profiles of Internet
standard mail protocols that provide a reasonable approximation to
Group 3 fax services, optionally adding new services that are
considered useful.  In turn, it is essential that this be done in a way
that is
compatible with most deployed SMTP MTAs and MIME user agents, and which
facilitates effective
interworking between Internet mail user agents, mail transfer agents,
onramp gateways, and offramp gateways.

 The initial efforts of the working group focused upon the development of a
simple mode for sending facsimile via email.  The simple mode defines
transport
of an agreed minimum subset image file format using standard Internet mail and
MIME mechanisms.  As a second stage, the working group will build upon the
simple mode and specify enhancements to provide additional  integration of
facsimile service within the context of Internet mail.    An extended or full
mode is targeted to provide facilities which were not addressed in the the
"simple mode" specification.   In particular, the extended/full mode will
provide support for message confirmation and capabilities identification
within
the context of Internet Mail. 

Where ever possible, the working group will use and adapt existing standard
mechanisms to achieve extended/full mode operations. In particular, the
working
group will use the Simple Mail Transfer
Protocol (SMTP) for transmission and receipt of Internet faxes, the 
Delivery Status Notification (DSN) for delivery reporting, and the
Message Disposition Notification (MDN) for optional reporting of
receipt of the message by the recipient. The working group may define
new Internet media types, and new DSN status codes. It may add
additional attributes to the DSN (delivery status notification)
format, and/or to the MDN (message disposition notification) format.

Delivery confirmation permits the originator of a facsimile to know that it
has
been “delivered”.  Because the technical details of Internet mail are somewhat
different than those of dial-up facsimile, the appropriate functionality in an
e-mail environment must be carefully considered.   Issues of message delivery
and disposition for Internet facsimile will be addressed within the extended
mode documents. 

Capabilities exchange enables a fax sender to select and execute a fax
operation whose parameters are fully supported by the fax recipient.     In
the
context of Internet fax via e-mail, capabilities identification would enable a
recipient to identify its Internet fax specific capabilities, so that an
Internet fax sender may choose a media type and operation that is fully
supported by the recipient.  Due to the asynchronous nature of email
transport,
multiple different mechanisms are possible,, which may include message
exchange, directory lookup and interactive query, but the intent is to specify
a preferred method among those available.    Other elements to be
considered in
capabilities identification include the list of features to be supported,
feature registration and feature expression.   The working group anticipates
using the media feature framework under development by the Content
Negotiations
working group assuming that the functionality is applicable and the work is
targeted for completion in time to be referenced.   In line with this
direction, the working group will develop a schema document for fax specific
features.   

For interconnecting fax services over the dial-up telephone network and
carriage of facsimile message data over the Internet, two types of
interface systems are possible:

o    Onramp - Dial-up/Internet Fax gateway, moving data from classic or
     Internet-aware dial-up fax products and services to the Internet
o    Offramp - Internet/Dial-up Fax gateway, moving data from the Internet to
     classic or Internet-aware dial-up fax products and services

The working group  will alsodevelop specifications for onramp and offramp
gateways. These documents may also address related implementation issues such
as offramp delivery reporting, cover page, identification and gateway access
and authorization requirements.  Extensions to the Delivery Service
Notification (DSN) formats will be considered in order to provide reporting on
the results of offramp transactions,.      The working group may  also
consider
enhancements to the offramp gateway addressing specification already produced
and will publish a framework document, indicating terminology and goals of
sending facsimile over the Internet. 

The group will revise the "simple mode" documents for better clarity,
and in light of implementation and deployment experience.

There are also standard mechanisms under development within the IETF which may
be useful to enable more robust  Internet fax operations going forward.   
Relevant areas include:  

- Security: Authentication and Encryption (OpenPGP and S-MIME)
- On Demand SMTP using ATRN
- Mail Capabilities query and exchange mechanisms

The working group will review new proposed standards as they become available
and consider incorporation by reference within the simple and extended mode
documents, where this will improve clarity, functionality and interworking.   

The working group will take note of quality of service
issues.    

The working group will continue to coordinate its activities with other
facsimile-related standards bodies and related work groups, notably the ITU-T
Study Group 8.   

 Goals and Milestones:  
  
Aug 98 Submit Internet Draft of extended mode specification for use at IETF
meeting  - done

Sep 98 Submit Internet Drafts for reporting extensions and fax feature
schema -
done 

Oct 98 Submit Internet Drafts for extended mode, reporting extensions and fax
feature schema to the ITU - done

Oct 98 Submit Goals and Terminology document to IESG for publication as an
Informational RFC - done

Dec, 98 Submit extended mode messaging specification and related components
(reporting extensions and fax feature schema) to IESG for consideration as
standards track documents

Dec, 98 Submit GSTN address element extensions in e-mail services
specification
to the IESG for consideration as a standards track document

Dec, 98 Review requirements to progress simple mode documents to draft
standard

Jan 99 Submit Internet Drafts on Onramp/Offramp considerations and Offramp
reporting                 extensions 

Jan 99 Submit updated Internet Drafts for simple mode documents (core
document,
offramp addressing and TIFF) 
Mar, 99         Submit Onramp/Offramp  document to IESG
for                            publication as an Informational document   
 Submit Offramp reporting extensions document to IESG for consideration as a
standards track document 
Mar 99 Submit updated simple mode drafts to IESG for consideration as draft
standards

Apr 99 Submit Internet Draft on Refinements to Reporting Extensions for
Internet Fax

Apr 99 Submit Internet Draft on On-Demand SMTP Delivery Profile for Internet
Fax
July 99 Submit Refinement to Reporting Extensions for Internet Fax to IESG for
consideration as a standards track document

July 99 Submit On Demand SMTP Delivery Profile document to IESG for
consideration as a standards track document 

*------------------------------------------------*
James Rafferty			
President, Human Communications 	
12 Kevin Drive			
Danbury, CT  06811-2901		
USA					
Voice/Fax:  +1-203-746-4367
Email:  [email-masked]
	 [email-masked]

HC Web Site:  http://www.humancomm.com  
*---------------------------------------------------

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 10:41:44 -0500

James, et al,

Looks good.  I've suggested some wording changes, below, but nothing major.

d/

>features of Group 3 facsimile using Internet email, but to integrate the two

(Move this first sentence of the second paragraph into the first paragraph.
 The first paragraph of a working group charter is used to 'advertise' and
explain working groups, so that paragraph should include both the problem
and the goal or nature of the solution.)

To make the sentence into a positive:

The goal of the fax working group is to emulate Group 3 facsimile services,
within fully conformant Internet mail, to permit store-and-forward
exchanges between fax systems, using the Internet, as well as to integrate
the global facsimile and Internet mail environments.

>onramp gateways, and offramp gateways.

Change "In turn" sentence to:  As a profile to Internet mail, all
specifications will retain and permit conformance to Internet standards for
email.  Further, the profile will seek compatibility with most deployed
SMTP MTA's and MIME user agents, in order to faciliate adoption of the profile.

>the context of Internet Mail. 

(The above paragraph seems to be for the last round of effort, rather than
the next, so I suggest making it more historical:)

The initial efforts of the working group focusse upon the development of a
core, simple mode for sending facsimile and a core, extended (or full) mode
which closely approximates GSTN-based G3 fascsimile, with message
confirmation and capabilities identification within the context of Internet
mail.

>- Security: Authentication and Encryption (OpenPGP and S-MIME)

encryption -> privacy

>- On Demand SMTP using ATRN

..., for SMTP over recipient-initiated connections

>Jan 99 Submit Internet Drafts on Onramp/Offramp considerations and Offramp

Given the complexities of onramps and offramps, will we be able to produce
this, this quickly?

>Mar 99 Submit updated simple mode drafts to IESG for consideration as draft

If we want to progress the simple mode documents, to Draft Standard, more
quickly, I suspect we could achieve February.  On the other hand, I haven't
heard anyone claim there is that much urgency.

>consideration as a standards track document 

d/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker                                       Tel: +60 (19) 3299 445
<mailto:[email-masked]>             Post Office Box 296, U.P.M.
                                         Serdang, Selangor 43400 MALAYSIA
Brandenburg Consulting                                          
<http://www.brandenburg.com>                       Tel: +1 (408) 246 8253
Fax: +1(408)273 6464              675 Spruce Dr., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA