Subject: Draft Minutes for Internet Fax WG November Meeting

From: James Rafferty <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 12:17:21 -0500

Folks,    

The draft minutes for the November meeting are below.    

My thanks to our scribe Glenn Parsons for excellent note taking.    

Please respond with any comments about the accuracy or clarity 
of the minutes ASAP ; I will send the final version to the IETF 
proceedings folks after the review.    

For any comments, debate or followup to items contained in the 
minutes, please take these up in new threads.   

Regards,   

James Rafferty
Chair, IETF Internet Fax WG

The draft minutes follow:   

Internet Fax WG - November 11, 1999
Chair:  James Rafferty
Reported by:  Glenn Parsons

James Rafferty presented the agenda and it was agreed.

Slides as presented by the chair at this meeting are available at the
following URL:   www.imc.org/ietf-fax/nov99-meeting.ppt

ITU Cooperation

James updated the group on the ITU-T SG8 meeting that happened in
Maidenhead in September 1999.  A delegation of three from ISOC attended
representing the Fax WG.  At this meeting T.37 Amd. 1 was finally approved.

This group sent a communication on Full Mode requirements and
synchronization that was reviewed.  It was noted that the ITU view
cooperation as high priority. It was suggested that a follow-on
communication should be sent in January for the next SG8 - the meeting agreed.

Last Call Drafts

The Full addressing document draft-ietf-fax-fulladdr-06.txt is in IETF last
call to Proposed Standard.  There is some concern that this is similar to
the recent Antii URL document.  The ADs confirmed that they have not yet
looked at this - but it is on the list.

The WG expressed concern since other groups are starting to reference the
minimal set document (RFC2303).  The authors discussed the registration
issues with IANA about 8 months ago.
Simple Mode to Draft

The editors have been working on refining the text for these documents to
prepare them for Draft Standard.  James gave an update on the current
interoperability status.

Draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-03.txt (update of RFC 2301)

Lloyd McIntyre presented the additional clarifications to this draft since
Oslo.  These were agreed by the meeting.  

* 5.2.3  JBIG Fax Profile (T.85) designated at default for T82Options
instead of base JBIG (T.82)
* 2.2.2 & 6.2.1  Noted that metric equivalence resolutions (204x196 &
408x391) may be used in low and high resolutions

The slides from this presentation are available at the following URL:
www.imc.org/ietf-fax/nov99-tiff-fx.ppt

Lloyd also indicated that an IPR statement has been submitted by Xerox for
the TIFF-M profile.  The license is available free of charge. There are
currently two implementors independent of Xerox that possess licenses.

This draft is ready to move forward - James proposed that we issue a WG
last call after this meeting.  The meeting agreed.

There is a requirement to make TIFF adjustments for new T.30 tag additions.
 The issue is how to do this without breaking the standard.  It was
suggested that these could be added in as we move up the standards track.
Our AD Keith said no, these should be put in a separate document.  Another
suggestion was to create an IANA registrations section for these new tags.

An interoperability report has previously been prepared by Rob Buckley and
Lloyd McIntyre for TIFF-FX. 

Draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-01.txt (Update of RFC 2305)

Co-author Ohno-san confirmed that there have been no revisions since Oslo.
The FaxConnect reports are done, but more needs to be done in the
reporting.  Keith advised that the WG needs to ensure that at least two
companies can interoperate with each feature.  James will go back and
summarize the details.

Ohno-san re-announced that theWIDE consortium has free code available
implementing this.   The URL will be reported on the list.   

Draft-ietf-fax-faxaddr-v2-00.txt  & Draft-ietf-fax-minaddr-v2-00.txt  

These drafts contain improvements of readability from the original RFCs.
James noted, however, that we do not have extensive interoperability
experience with some portions of these documents. James encouraged
implementors to complete interoperability testing.  It was proposed to send
these documents for WG last call, the meeting agreed.

Other Drafts in Process

Draft-ietf-fax-coverpage-03.txt

Graham Klyne introduced this revision that contains very few changes. The
WG is waiting on VPIM work on primary message content to guide us.  Even
though the content was changed to multipart/related from
mulitpart/fax-message, the direction is still unclear.  Th current view
from Ned Freed is to use a new top level MIME/RFC822 header with content
disposition.

This document describes three cases of how a cover page is included in a
document. Dave Crocker suggests that this should be generic beyond just
fax.  For example, IPP is certainly interested.

The consensus is that this document is still immature.  We want to make
sure that this is coordinated amongst various communities (FAX, VPIM, IPP,
IMPP, ...).

Draft-ietf-fax-feature-schema-v2-00.txt (updated RFC 2531)

Graham indicated that this has been updated based on the revised TIFF-FX.
Several clarifications were made (e.g., TIFF-M description).  However, a
major change was made with the file structure.

The TIFF file structure was changed to not tie to the profiles but be
somewhat more general.  This is not compatible with the previous version.
It is viewed as important to separate the file structure (i.e., ordering of
the formats) from the profiles.  The formats are:
TIFF, TIFF limited (F), TIFF minimal (S), TIFF MRC, TIFF MRC limited

As a result of this change, the documents needs to be recycled at Proposed
Standard.  James suggested issuing a WG last call with intention to recycle
at Proposed Standard. The meeting agreed.

Draft-ietf-fax-feature-t30-mapping-02.txt

There have been no changes in this draft.  James proposed a WG last call
with the intent to go to Informational. The meeting agreed.

New Drafts

Draft-ietf-fax-implementors-guide-00.txt

The authors were not at the meeting, so James reviewed this document.  The
intent is to clarify the implementation aspects of simple mode and extended
mode.  A list of open implementation issues at the end of document.  This
is a first draft and needs a lot more work.

Draft-ietf-fax-content-negotiation-00.txt 

Graham introduced that the goal of this work is to enable content
negotiation while ensuring normal behaviour with email and NO admin
messages (i.e., messages sent only for this).  It should work with simple &
extended mode fax.

The current process flow is:  sender sends initial message, receiver
requests alternative, sender sends alternative.  Note that the receiver
chooses to start negotiation.  This is a two roundtrip process.  The
optimized case here is to send after you know the end user's capabilities
(e.g., from RESCAP or previous sends).

The sender uses MDN requests with the proposed content-alternative header
containing a CONNEG syntax. The receiver sends capabilities and sender can
choose if it wants to resend.

Graham confirmed that this is new and needs to be reviewed. The slides from
this presentation are available at the following URL:
www.imc.org/ietf-fax/nov99-conneg.pdf

Draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-00.txt 

Dave Crocker introduced this Full mode service document.  The goal is to
point to the specifications (as simple mode does), that is this document is
a placeholder until the supporting enhancements are made.  Currently, the
document is missing a security section -- there is a need to add privacy
but no authentication.  

Draft-ietf-fax-timely-delivery-00.txt 

Graham Klyne introduced this document that allows end-to-end delivery of
S&F fax within seconds using ESMTP extensions.  The issue (and driving
factor) is the lack of determinism - the sender has little control after
the message is sent and the system has not set rules for time.  The goal is
to give control back to the sender. The document uses the proposed
DELIVERBY ESMTP extension from Dan Newman.

This is still very preliminary. The slides from this presentation are
available at the following URL: www.imc.org/ietf-fax/nov99-timely.pdf

Milestones

James reiterated his view from Oslo that this is the last meeting under the
current charter.  Cover Page & Implementor's guide will take some time to
complete - but these are the only ones left.

We need a process for new work.  James proposes a new Fax extensions WG
with a new charter.  Keith proposes that it makes sense to keep the
existing WG and just re-charter.  Others noted that this would make it
easier to keep liaisons open with other groups.

Dave Crocker proposed a new charter that highlights the details of the new
work to be done, they are:
* Gateway requirements (only T.37) 
* Implementor's guide
* Full mode fax
* Security
* JBIG 2
* Extended mode to draft
* Gateway selection

The group started to discuss if we really want to standardize gateway
behaviour.  This and further discussion of the charter was deferred to the
list. 

The meeting confirmed that people are interested in working on this.
JBIG2 - Compact Image Representation

Lloyd McIntyre gave the meeting a introduction presentation on JBIG2
compression and data structures.  JBIG2 approval in ISO/ITU is anticipated
in Feb 2000.

JBIG 2 is very different from JBIG1 because of the quantum leap in
compression. JBIG2 uses segmentation and type specific encoding.  For
example, text is treated as a connected component that is repeated.  The
segments are stored in MRC layers of TIFF-FX.

James expressed concern about potential IPR issues.  ISO is so concerned
with this that there is a low level version of this without IPR.  Lloyd
will ensure that all IPR on JBIG2 is made available by March.

TIFF-FX extensions are planned for March 2000.  This would include new
profiles T and M1, higher resolutions for all profiles except S and Feature
Schema.

The slides from this presentation are available at the following URL:
www.imc.org/ietf-fax/nov99-jbig.ppt

The meeting adjourned.

*------------------------------------------------*
James Rafferty			
President, Human Communications LLC
12 Kevin Drive			
Danbury, CT  06811-2901		
USA					
Voice/Fax:  +1-203-746-4367
Fax to email:  +1-603-925-5753  (Current Preferred Fax Number)
Email/Internet Fax:  [email-masked]
Alternate email : [email-masked],
 [email-masked] (chg from csi.com)

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