Re: [earlywarning] Finishing the Charter Text Discussions

Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu> Wed, 07 April 2010 20:25 UTC

Return-Path: <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
X-Original-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 900BF28C13B for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 13:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 cfnbu-FicQCm for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 13:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from serrano.cc.columbia.edu (serrano.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3024328C14A for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 13:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ice.cs.columbia.edu (ice.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.18.177]) (user=hgs10 mech=PLAIN bits=0) by serrano.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o37KOqnW007518 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 7 Apr 2010 16:24:52 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To: <BE16D422273834438B43B6F7D730220F0D1A338C@BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 16:24:52 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F51FC9E3-2110-4481-8590-F1779183B368@cs.columbia.edu>
References: <20100406111818.284140@gmx.net><BE16D422273834438B43B6F7D730220F0D1A2FDB@BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net> <C99FF8B7-61F4-4A05-8389-4F90E43F12F4@g11.org.uk> <BE16D422273834438B43B6F7D730220F0D1A338C@BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net>
To: "SENNETT, DEWAYNE A (ATTCINW)" <DS2225@att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
X-No-Spam-Score: Local
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.6
Cc: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>, earlywarning@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [earlywarning] Finishing the Charter Text Discussions
X-BeenThere: earlywarning@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for Authority-to-Individuals \(Early Warning\) Emergency " <earlywarning.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/earlywarning>
List-Post: <mailto:earlywarning@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 20:25:11 -0000

I gather you'd also require each new web site to get permission from AT&T, given that it can have an adverse effect? I didn't know the appellate decision on network neutrality would have an effect quite as quickly :-)

Henning

On Apr 7, 2010, at 4:20 PM, SENNETT, DEWAYNE A (ATTCINW) wrote:

> In regards to the comment on the first sentence, all services have to be
> evaluated for impact before they are implemented in any live
> environment.  However, a service that is designed from the beginning
> with no consideration of the impacts to the access technologies is a
> very badly designed service.  ATOCA will have an adverse effect to at
> least some of the access technologies and if ATOCA is designed without
> any considerations of the capabilities and limitations of the access
> technologies, it will fail and it will cause adverse effects to the
> access technologies.
> 
> The proof of network congestion already exists.  This is demonstrated
> repeatedly as "all circuits busy" error responses, dropped calls,
> fast-busy tones, delayed delivery of SMS messages, etc. 
> 
> Since ATOCA is the new communications entity beginning proposed, the
> burden of proof is on ATOCA to prove that it will not adversely impact
> any of the associated access technologies.
> 
> DeWayne 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: earlywarning-bounces@ietf.org
> [mailto:earlywarning-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ken carlberg
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 12:48 PM
> To: SENNETT, DEWAYNE A (ATTCINW)
> Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; earlywarning@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [earlywarning] Finishing the Charter Text Discussions
> 
> 
> On Apr 7, 2010, at 11:30 AM, SENNETT, DEWAYNE A (ATTCINW) wrote:
> 
>> "The ATOCA solutions will not adversely affect the ability of any
> access
>> technology to provide emergency services to the citizens (e.g. 9-1-1
>> calls) or to provide communication services to first responders or
> other
>> authorized emergency services personnel.  Additionally, ATOCA is not
>> replacement solution for any authority to citizen alerting supported
> by
>> any access technology."
> 
> given the previous thread on this list, I'm a bit leery of that first
> sentence.  But, if it were agreed to add it in, then I would expect the
> individuals who make a claim that an ATOCA solution adversely affects
> 9-1-1 type calls will be required to prove it instead of simply stating
> a position.
> 
> as for the second sentence, that is out of scope of the IETF.  any
> deployment of what is considered an ATOCA solution is a market decision.
> 
> -ken
> 
> _______________________________________________
> earlywarning mailing list
> earlywarning@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning
> _______________________________________________
> earlywarning mailing list
> earlywarning@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning
>