Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3

[Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>]

I will remove both the list of draft names and the paragraph that
introduces those and replace it with text describing deliverables as
is typically done for charters.  At this point, I think everyone is
well aware of the related documents.

Thanks,
Mary.

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:57 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> It is not clear whether you are proposing a rewrite that removes the names of the deliverables, and therefore removes the problem that way, or not. Without seeing words, I cannot comment on the specifics of that.
>
> In any case, the minimum change to me is to remove the words indicated.
>
> regards
>
> Keith
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail]
>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Mary Barnes
>> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 7:00 PM
>> To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>> Cc: DISPATCH
>> Subject: Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3
>>
>> Hi Keith,
>>
>> That's a valid concern and we can rewrite the deliverables as
>> functional descriptions as we have done for other WG charters
>> even in cases where documents existed (e.g., overload).  The
>> current text is trying to say that these documents map to
>> deliverables and can be used as WG documents, although as it
>> notes these should be considered starting points (i.e., it's
>> understood the proposed WG has change control), but certainly
>> the current text is somewhat misleading.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mary.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:43 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > I have a major issue with including "which shall form the
>> bases of the WG documents" into the charter. To me this is
>> confusing the charter discussion with the working group that
>> might eventually result deciding what its deliverables, and
>> their contents, shall be.
>> >
>> > regards
>> >
>> > Keith
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: [e-mail]
>> >> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Mary Barnes
>> >> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 6:38 PM
>> >> To: DISPATCH
>> >> Subject: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3
>> >>
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> Below, please find version 3 of the VIPR proposed charter.
>> >> It's been updated to reflect ML feedback, in particular
>> VAP has been
>> >> added and clarifications have been made with regards to impacts
>> >> (i.e., none) on existing PSTN interfaces.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Mary
>> >> (DISPATCH WG co-chair)
>> >>
>> >> ============================================
>> >> VIPR Charter Proposal (Version 3)
>> >>
>> >> WG Name:  Verification Involving PSTN Reachability (VIPR)
>> >>
>> >> There are two globally deployed address spaces for communications
>> >> used by more than a billion people daily - phone numbers and DNS
>> >> rooted address such as web servers and email addresses. The
>> >> inter-domain signaling design of SIP is primarily designed
>> for email
>> >> style addresses yet a large percentage of SIP deployments
>> mostly use
>> >> phone numbers for identifying users. The goal of this
>> working group
>> >> is to enable inter-domain communications over the the
>> Internet, using
>> >> protocols such as SIP, while still allowing people to use phone
>> >> numbers to identify the person with whom they wish to communicate.
>> >>
>> >> The VIPR WG will address this problem by developing a peer to peer
>> >> based approach to finding domains that claim to be
>> responsible for a
>> >> given phone number and validation protocols to ensure a reasonable
>> >> likelihood that a given domain actually is responsible for
>> the phone
>> >> number. In this context, "responsible" means an administrative
>> >> domain, which is at least one of the domains, to which a
>> PSTN call to
>> >> this phone number would be routed. Once the domain responsible for
>> >> the phone number is found, existing protocols, such as SIP, can be
>> >> used for inter-domain communications.
>> >>
>> >> Some validation protocols may be based on knowledge
>> gathered around a
>> >> PSTN call; for example, the ability to prove a call was
>> received over
>> >> the PSTN based on start and stop times.
>> >> Other validation schemes, such as examining fingerprints or
>> >> watermarking of PSTN media to show that a domain received a
>> >> particular PSTN phone call, may also be considered by the working
>> >> group. This validation will be accomplished using publicly
>> available
>> >> open interfaces to the PSTN, so the validation can be performed by
>> >> any domain wishing to participate.  The WG will select and
>> >> standardize at least one validation scheme.
>> >>
>> >> The validation mechanism requires a domain to gather and maintain
>> >> information related to PSTN calls.  This information is
>> used by call
>> >> agents such as phones, SBCs and IP PBXs to route calls.
>> The WG will
>> >> define a client-server protocol between these call agents and the
>> >> entity within a domain that maintains the information.
>> >>
>> >> To help mitigate SPAM issues when using SIP between
>> domains, the WG
>> >> will define a mechanism to enable one domain to check that
>> incoming
>> >> SIP messages are coming from a validated phone number.  A phone
>> >> number is considered validated if it is coming from a
>> domain to which
>> >> the calling domain had previously successfully placed a
>> PSTN call.
>> >> The working group will define new SIP headers and option tags, as
>> >> necessary, to enable this.
>> >>
>> >> The essential characteristic of VIPR is establishing
>> authentication
>> >> by PSTN reachability when it is not possible to use a direct
>> >> reference to ENUM databases or other direct assertions of
>> PSTN number
>> >> ownership. Elements such as public ENUM easily coexist
>> with VIPR but
>> >> no direct interaction with ENUM will be required.  The
>> solution set
>> >> defined by this WG will be incrementally deployable using only
>> >> existing interfaces to the PSTN.  No changes will be required to
>> >> existing PSTN capabilities, no new database access is
>> needed nor is
>> >> any new support from PSTN service providers required.
>> >>
>> >> The problem statement and some possible starting points
>> for solutions
>> >> are further discussed in the following internet drafts which shall
>> >> form the bases of the WG documents:
>> >>
>> >> draft-rosenberg-dispatch-vipr-overview
>> >> draft-rosenberg-dispatch-vipr-reload-usage
>> >> draft-rosenberg-dispatch-vipr-pvp
>> >> draft-rosenberg-dispatch-vipr-sip-antispam
>> >> draft-rosenberg-dispatch-vipr-vap
>> >>
>> >> The working group will carefully coordinate with the
>> security area,
>> >> O&M area, as well as the appropriate RAI WGs such as sipcore and
>> >> p2psip.
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> dispatch mailing list
>> >> [e-mail]
>> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>> >>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dispatch mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>>