[earlywarning] What problem is ATOCA trying to address?

"SENNETT, DEWAYNE A (ATTCINW)" <DS2225@att.com> Fri, 26 March 2010 01:18 UTC

Return-Path: <DS2225@att.com>
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 A85EE3A691F for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 AEepxnsH9lo4 for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail146.messagelabs.com (mail146.messagelabs.com [216.82.241.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 281303A6A7F for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: DS2225@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-146.messagelabs.com!1269566326!25835404!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.112.25]
Received: (qmail 1495 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2010 01:18:47 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp3.sbc.com (HELO tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com) (144.160.112.25) by server-2.tower-146.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 26 Mar 2010 01:18:47 -0000
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2Q1Ig9H003281 for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:18:42 -0500
Received: from td03xsmtp007.US.Cingular.Net (intexchapp01.us.cingular.net [135.179.64.45] (may be forged)) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2Q1IZ3k003192 for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:18:35 -0500
Received: from bd01xsmtp004.US.Cingular.Net ([135.163.18.45]) by td03xsmtp007.US.Cingular.Net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:18:35 -0500
Received: from BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net ([135.214.26.11]) by bd01xsmtp004.US.Cingular.Net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:18:34 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:18:34 -0700
Message-ID: <BE16D422273834438B43B6F7D730220F0798DC78@BD01MSXMB015.US.Cingular.Net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: What problem is ATOCA trying to address?
Thread-Index: AcrMgkE7gtPNc7rNRU+zitbk1HHB1w==
From: "SENNETT, DEWAYNE A (ATTCINW)" <DS2225@att.com>
To: earlywarning@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Mar 2010 01:18:34.0937 (UTC) FILETIME=[41734A90:01CACC82]
Subject: [earlywarning] What problem is ATOCA trying to address?
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: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 01:18:26 -0000

It is not clear exactly what problem ATOCA is trying to solve.

The first item needed for alerting is a common alerting message. This has been defined as the CAP protocol which has been adopted by ITU. The current version is CAP 1.1 and version 1.2 is expected soon.

The second item needed is transport of CAP messages. Various techniques already exist and Brian Rosen has already introduced a draft into ECRIT to define how to deliver CAP via SIP.

The third item is distribution of the alert information. Various techniques already exist such as multicast, cell broadcast, MBMS, EAS, CMAS etc..

The fourth item is authentication and authorization of the alert origination. The functionality is country specific and these countries also have defined methods and procedures to address this.

So what item remains to be addressed by ATOCA?

<--------------------------->
DeWayne Sennett, AT&T Services, Inc.
Sent from my BlackBerry