Re: [Atoca] Requirement D2: "Large Audience"

That would have to be dependent on the regional requirement and delivery mechanism. For example in the US it is not a requirement for EAS or CMAS nor can it be provided.
Brian K. Daly
   Sent to you by AT&T... 
   America's Fastest Mobile Broadband
       Network.  Rethink Possible.
   +1.425.580.6873
-------
Sent from my Blackberry

----- Original Message -----
From: earlywarning-bounces@ietf.org <earlywarning-bounces@ietf.org>
To: Art Botterell <artbotterell@gmail.com>; Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
Cc: earlywarning@ietf.org <earlywarning@ietf.org>
Sent: Sun Jan 16 21:12:05 2011
Subject: Re: [Atoca] Requirement D2: "Large Audience"

Interesting tidbit from the Australian warning system discussions: the originating systems (the first relay) provides a report to the emergency authority on the number of deliveries.  That suggests that feedback occurs at some level.

I don't know whether this sort of reporting is something that would be part of a requirement, but I'll try to find out.

--Martin

On 2011-01-17 at 14:20:37, Art Botterell wrote:
> Mainly I was just suggesting one way of looking at the "how large is
> 'large'" question.  Although it does highlight some of Martin's
> questions about how to adapt a session initiation protocol to a one-to-
> very-many application, if that's what we have in mind.  As he rightly
> points out, responses don't only happen at the application level.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> - Art
> 
> On Jan 16, 2011, at 11:22 AM, Hannes Tschofenig
> <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Art,
> >
> > that's an interesting comment particularly since we do not have a
> requirement for responses by receivers (or Recipients) of alert
> messages. I am not sure to whom they would sent their response to. To
> the originator, to some gateway, etc?
> >
> > Ciao
> > Hannes
> >
> > On Jan 15, 2011, at 11:58 PM, Art Botterell wrote:
> >
> >> One difference in "broadcast" delivery is that it's frequntly
> impractical and/or undesirable to try to track individual deliveries or
> process individual responses.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> - Art
> >>
> >> On Jan 15, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Hannes Tschofenig
> <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> during the ATOCA meeting at IETF#79 Igor raised a question
> regarding requirement D2:
> >>> "
> >>> Req-D2:
> >>>
> >>>    The protocol solution MUST allow delivery of messages
> >>>    simultaneously to a large audience.
> >>> "
> >>>
> >>> He was asking whether there is a need to put a number for large
> audience there.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe Igor has a specific number in mind that would matter from a
> protocol design perspective but I do not have such a number that would
> provide a meaningful distinction.
> >>>
> >>> There is, however, the question what types of problems we expect
> with very large number of alert message receivers and how we document
> this aspect in the requirements document.
> >>>
> >>> Suggestions? Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Ciao
> >>> Hannes
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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

_______________________________________________
earlywarning mailing list
earlywarning@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning