Subject: [salud] IETF 78 Meeting Minutes SALUD

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 08:13:07 +0200

Dear all,
Please find the minutes of the SALUD meeting.

Comments?

Best Regards

Roland

SALUD 1st Afternoon session 30.07.2010

------ Start Minutes ----------------

Jonathan Lennox took Jabber room
Minutes by Roland Jesske

---- Note well  was presented -----

Agenda was presented and agreed ( http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/78/agenda/salud.html )

Presentations can be found at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/78/materials.html 

Carter for SALUD (Sip ALerting for User Devices WG) was presented

No Questions and concerns where mentioned.

Adoption of WG Work Item
draft-liess-dispatch-alert-info-urns-02 <http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-liess-dispatch-alert-info-urns-02.txt> 

Keith Drage: Asked if the scope of the draft fits to the charter 

Dale Worley: answered Yes

Jonathan: any other candidates apply 

Dale: Answer no

Dale asked if it is the way to do first a 03 draft or put it direct to the 01

Jonathan: If there's going to be a -03 version of the draft, the WG consensus call as to whether to adopt it would need to wait until that version is published.

Robert Sparks: Put the revisions in a 03 draft and asked then for the adoption of the draft as WI.
Keith: same in line
Keith asked to note that approach

It was agreement that the 02 Draft will be updated to 03 with the issues discussed and then poll for adoption the 03 Version as WI Item.

Dale: presented why the alert urn WG was worth to be built. See http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/78/slides/salud-2.ppt 

Keith: said that ring back tone is not a international definition as ITU-T has defined this. Keith will look up for the correct term.

Comment to Slide - 3
It was mentioned that it is worth that both ringtones and semantics can be presented.

Keith: In ITU-T Recommendation E.182 (APPLICATION  OF  TONES  AND  RECORDED  ANNOUNCEMENTS IN  TELEPHONE  SERVICES) the term of definition can be found (In ANNEX A).  Ringing tone is the correct term.

Laura Liess Presentation: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/78/slides/salud-0.ppt

Keith: The next version will be also in DISPATCH not in SALUD in the name.

Laura pointed to the ad hoc meeting of the day before and will point to the decisions of that add hoc.

Laura presented the Goals.

Slide #1 Alert-Info URN Definition and Purpose

Laura pointed that the add hoc meeting decided that rendering and semantics

Adam Roach: does not understand the difference of rendering and semantic indications

Laura: Semantic is Alert URN: call wait and rendering is like , long short ect.

Meeting had no further issues.

Slide #2 180 vs. 18x responses

Laura pointed that add hoc would like to see the Alert URN to be included in all 1xx excluding 100.

Keith: Pointed to the backward compatibility. In 18x could happen that existing implementation will not 

Jonathan: You are only doing with the URN when you want to do something with it. Question if something will went wrong when the URN appears. But that does not look like

Dale: Thinks that the Alert URN will be ignored when the device is not understanding the semantics.

Jabber Room: Gonzalo confirmed that he will check with RFC 3261 if this if this is OK to put A URN into 1xx.

Keith: Propose a section that speaks about compatibility.

John Haluska: Was it discussed if something will be sent in band (like an announcement) and an alert URN. What will happen? Was this considered?

It was mentioned that, perhaps it would be worth to include such consideration into the draft.

This was agreed

No more comments.

Slide #3 Requirements.

Laura: asked if some more requirements are needed.

This was not seen.

Slide #4 Used Cases

Laura pointed to the discussion of the add hoc meeting. And the agreement to put this into the draft. Laura asked Adam to help into the draft.

Keith: Can I ask that we only put in definitions where it is clear and really defined in the world.

Adam: Thinks that a couple of that are well defined and some not and of course we have to look which we will add really.

Some of them are more US specific.

Dale: We need to have a extensibility to include this.

Adam: Yes. We need it that people are satisfied within the future that if such definitions are needed that it could be included.

Laura: do not in the draft

Adam: No we do not need. But if you do that we could do this. And if it is needed then 

Jonathan: Asked for reorder if this is a reason or a failure cause. So do not add it.

Adam: agreed

Keith: We need a clear definition. IANA registration information needs words that for registration purposes that if somebody adds a new extension. Then proper information is needed and is fully described to provide the correct syntax and behaviour.

Dale: a lot of has to do with the semantic versus rendering issue
It must be clear what the meaning is rendering or semantic.

Agreed

Keith: We must match Requirement 16 in the draft.

Slide #5 ABNF Syntax

It was agreed in the ad hoc the change the ABNF as proposed.

Jonathan: Why we need 27 letters per line. He proposed to look on that.

Slide #6 Multiple URNs  vs. single URN  

Jabber Room: John Peterson said he will sent out comments on the list

Keith: How we will differentiate between the discussion of requirements and the rest.

Kith: propose a mini group last call on the requirement before proceed with the rest.

Dale: Noted

Slide #7 A-I URN Values and extensibility rules 

Laura asked for comments and opinions to those values.

Slide #8 Combination and Priority Rules  

Laura this is depending on the use of multiple or single URN

Slide #9 Extensibility rules

End of presentation.

Jonathan: Asking for security section. Asking what will happen if some semantics are in the URN that are not defined and how to trust the alert info. This should be covered by the security section.

Dale: Laura will within a few weeks upload the 03 draft and hum on the adoption as WI.

Keith: Propose not to meet in Beijing. He asked more for telephone conferences to get the issues done.

--- End of meeting ---

Best Regards
Roland Jesske

Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH
Fixed Mobile Engineering Deutschland
Roland Jesske
Heinrich-Hertz-Straße 3-7, 64295 Darmstadt
+49 6151 628-2766 (Tel.)
+49 521 9210-3753  (Fax)
+49 171 8618-445  (Mobil)
E-Mail: [email-masked]
www.telekom.com  

Erleben, was verbindet. 

Deutsche Telekom Netzproduktion GmbH
Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Steffen Roehn (Vorsitzender)
Geschäftsführung: Dr. Bruno Jacobfeuerborn (Vorsitzender), Albert Matheis, Klaus Peren
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 14190
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn
USt-IdNr. DE 814645262

Große Veränderungen fangen klein an - Ressourcen schonen und nicht jede E-Mail drucken.