Re: [arch-d] ETSI launches new group on Non-IP Networking addressing 5G new services

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Thu, 09 April 2020 08:47 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9735B3A0F1B for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 01:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kuOu5OXBKT3V for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 01:47:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4731E3A0F1A for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 01:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 49A0B280554; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:47:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4168A2806CC; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:47:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37F21280554; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:47:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31585642C582; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:47:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 22AF43FD4B; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:46:42 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 10:46:42 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200409084642.GB23663@nic.fr>
References: <60a10451-5fbd-fcec-5389-7a72870dcc84@gmail.com> <6A3A4410-A889-46C7-8FD5-7C5AA85486A1@tzi.org> <20200408054204.GA6005@nic.fr> <6C2A3533-7F75-45B1-9B51-19938597174B@tzi.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6C2A3533-7F75-45B1-9B51-19938597174B@tzi.org>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 10.3
X-Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-8-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2019.11.5.63017
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/-WOvaimTIVv5K7OVwD6kLq0HHqo>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] ETSI launches new group on Non-IP Networking addressing 5G new services
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 08:47:13 -0000

On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 08:57:02PM +0200,
 Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote 
 a message of 27 lines which said:

> > It seems that IETF's answer is about another project, by ITU.
> 
> Yes.  I do know about the difference between ETSI and ITU-T.
> But the technical content (that I could find) was, at first look,
> indistinguishable to me;

I agree. But Toerless Eckert does not.
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 07:42:04AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1677/
> 
> It seems that IETF's answer is about another project, by ITU.

Yes.

>  ITU and ETSI have the same discourse

What information makes you think that ?
I do not think that that is true.

> <https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygroups/2017-2020/13/Documents/Internet_2030%20.pdf>

That document was input to ITU-T Study Group 13 (SG13) for the start
of Focus Group 2030 (FGNET2030). FGNET203 was not formally involved
in the creation of the Liaison Statements referred to in the
liaison exchange pointed to by Carsten. Instead that was done
by ITU-T Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Group (TSAG)
probably with help from SG13.

There are ITU-T members and contributors who think that
topics related directly to the evolution of IP (often
referred to as "New IP") should be discussed by interested
 parties directly to IETF instead of of being brought
into some IMHO obfuscated leadership statements via some liaison
process. At least thats what i believe, which is why we
have inofficial IETF side meetings about "New IP" and other
related topics. But then again, this is from my team working
only in FGNET2030, but not having been involved in any of the
payload of the TSAG/SG13 liaison statements.

> but, apparently, they operate separately.

Yes. ETSI is a completely separate SDO from ITU,
Not a United Nations organization.

Cheers
    Toerless

> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de
--- End Message ---