[earlywarning] (no subject)

["DALY, BRIAN K (ATTCINW)" <[e-mail]>]

Keith - We agree with you, and to further the point, in wireless
cellular IP networks a point to point solution would be problematic.
Cell Broadcast is used for CMAS because SMS cannot be used for any real
time alerting - it was not designed for that application and has serious
limitations, as the FCC CMSAAC studied.

 

When it comes to the evolved packet core and IMS, again a point to point
solution  will cause significant congestion on the network and a
broadcast/multicast solution must be used to effectively deliver alert
messages. Thus things like location and "priority" are already handled
in the delivery network.

 

ATIS and 3GPP will be studying how to support multimedia alerts in the
future, as recommended by the FCC CMSAAC. This is all beyond the scope
of this work effort.

 

Regards,

Brian

 

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:13:24 +0100

From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <[e-mail]>

Subject: Re: [earlywarning] Updated Charter Text for ATOCA

To: Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>,

      "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>

Message-ID:

 
<[e-mail]-lu
cent.com>

      

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

What I am not seeing here is any separation of the problem from the one
that cell broadcast attempts to solve. Fundamentally, cell broadcast, as
exists on all GSM, UTRAN and E-UTRAN based cell phones and is being used
for Tsunami warning and Public Warning, exists and is not going to
substantially change. The major limitation here is is length of message,
and what does get transmitted will be very much dependent on that
restriction.

 

Moreover I have heard from a number of governmental bodies that they are
happy with that situation and are not envisaging further standardisation
in that area outside of 3GPP.

 

So my view at the moment is that there is no point in IETF trying to
address the scope of what is already specified in cell broadcast (from
base station to end mobile).

 

regards

 

Keith