IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 2 - PSTN?

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Thu, 17 June 2010 20:54 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3963A6B1B for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:54:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.013
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.013 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.586, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 wQ2gNqAs2t+E for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9303A6B15 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAL8oGkyrR7Hu/2dsb2JhbACee3GoA5o2hRoEg1I
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,434,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="214011456"
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Jun 2010 20:54:54 +0000
Received: from [192.168.4.177] (rcdn-fluffy-8711.cisco.com [10.99.9.18]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o5HKsj8k003717; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:54:54 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilC-Qcndd6HfaRpDA_HYG-G3Dw_upkwxsIc-9TH@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:54:53 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <71B30FB7-E517-4142-8EB3-89609ED1314A@cisco.com>
References: <DB6CA94F-0EC9-4E27-A190-D12029CA61AE@cisco.com> <01a601cb0d1c$61ccd3d0$25667b70$%roni@huawei.com> <AANLkTilC-Qcndd6HfaRpDA_HYG-G3Dw_upkwxsIc-9TH@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Musgrave <peter.musgrave@magorcorp.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: DISPATCH list <dispatch@ietf.org>, Roni Even <Even.roni@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 2 - PSTN?
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:54:50 -0000

On Jun 16, 2010, at 5:53 AM, Peter Musgrave wrote:

> Perhaps we should make it clear in the charter that the work requires
> that a node using ViPR have the ability to make and receive PSTN calls
> (or interface to something that does)?

That seems like a very pragmatic and good approach. I'm always a fan of charters having truth in advertising.

> 
> I think general authentication without using PSTN reachability is a
> great idea 

Well, I think it might be more accurate to say it is "great problem". We don't really have any ideas yet on how to solve it other than public ENUM which is less successful than one might have hoped.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email