Re: [earlywarning] Finishing the Charter Text Discussions

Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com> Wed, 07 April 2010 20:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mlinsner@cisco.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 B54843A659A for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 13:07:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 wqzblkIU+OE1 for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 13:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2907A3A67A4 for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 13:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAMKCvEurRN+K/2dsb2JhbACbI3GiZJkcglyCLQQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.52,164,1270425600"; d="scan'208";a="249650747"
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Apr 2010 20:07:43 +0000
Received: from [10.116.195.126] (rtp-mlinsner-87113.cisco.com [10.116.195.126]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o37K7g9K007717; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 20:07:42 GMT
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.24.0.100205
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 16:07:35 -0400
From: Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com>
To: "DALY, BRIAN K (ATTCINW)" <BD2985@att.com>
Message-ID: <C7E25E47.232E4%mlinsner@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [earlywarning] Finishing the Charter Text Discussions
Thread-Index: AcrWi0usG9/KhYhZR3OiTWO1oA9w7wAAJi8QAACEjnc=
In-Reply-To: <FDFC6E6B2064844FBEB9045DF1E3FBBC4F8124@BD01MSXMB016.US.Cingular.Net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: 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 20:07:47 -0000

CMAS was opt-in by the carriers, not a requirement....??

-Marc-


On 4/7/10 3:56 PM, "DALY, BRIAN K (ATTCINW)" <BD2985@att.com> wrote:

> The second is more than a market decision - it is an interaction with a
> regulatory requirement.
> 
> Perhaps a better way to phrase is as follows:
> 
> "Additionally, ATOCA will not interfere with nor replace solutions
> designed to meet regulatory requirements for any authority to citizen
> alerting of any access technology."
> 
> Brian Daly
> AT&T
> 
> -----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