Re: [ECRIT] wg Status Update - as of 9/25/07

["James M. Polk" <[e-mail]>]

Sorry Hannes

I must have missed that note to the list

James

At 03:36 PM 9/27/2007, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>Hi James,
>
>regarding your draft: I have asked our ADs whether they are OK with 
>adding that document to the charter (if the WG agrees). Our ADs, 
>however, insisted on finishing the current documents first before we 
>add any new items. I agree that this is a useful approach.
>
>I posted that in a mail to the mailing list somewhere; I need to 
>find the mail and then I should also add it to the status update.
>
>Ciao
>Hannes
>
>-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> > Datum: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:41:54 -0500
> > Von: "James M. Polk" <[e-mail]>
> > An: "Roger Marshall" <[e-mail]>
> > CC: "ECRIT" <[e-mail]>, "Hannes Tschofenig" 
> <[e-mail]>, "Marc Linsner" <[e-mail]>
> > Betreff: Re: [ECRIT] wg Status Update - as of 9/25/07
>
> > Roger
> >
> > I've asked the chairs to ask the WG for WG comments on
> > 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace-01.txt
> > becoming a WG item.  This occurred both in a 8/2/07 email, and on a
> > 9/7/07 call discussing the phoneBCP that you, Hannes and Marc were
> > on.  The comments on that call indicated the chairs should ask the WG
> > to adopt this ID, and Hannes said he would, but has not to date (and
> > I don't know why).
> >
> > Given that Hannes made me present this ID for ~20 minutes in Chicago,
> > on 30 minutes notice to build the preso (during the meeting), I do
> > not believe this ID should be ignored when giving this type of WG
> > update, do you?
> >
> > I'm sure this was just an oversight....   ;-)
> >
> > James
> >
> > At 10:34 PM 9/25/2007, Roger Marshall wrote:
> > >Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> > >Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> > >         boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C7FFEE.1EB1B2F6"
> > >
> > >
> > >ECRIT WG Status Update - Sept 2007
> > >==================================
> > >
> > >Upcoming IETF Meeting
> > >=====================
> > >
> > >The next ECRIT (IETF70) meeting is scheduled for Dec 2-7, Vancouver B.C.
> > See:
> > ><http://www3.ietf.org/meetings/70-IETF.html>http://www3.ietf.org/ 
> meetings/70-IETF.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Other information:
> > >
> > >There is a new Web-based tool that can be used now to submit a new
> > >draft, see:
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04384.htm 
> l>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04384.html
> > >
> > >
> > >The meeting minutes from the last IETF69 are here:
> > ><http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07jul/minutes/ecrit.txt>http:// 
> www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07jul/minutes/ecrit.txt
> > >
> > >In addition, there is some progress on some of the wg related documents.
> > >
> > >Prior status reports are posted to the ECRIT WG status site. See:
> > ><http://www.tschofenig.priv.at/twiki/bin/view/EmergencyServices/Ecrit 
> StatusUpdate>http://www.tschofenig.priv.at/twiki/bin/view/EmergencyServices/EcritStatusUpdate
> > >
> > >Document Status
> > >===============
> > >
> > >In the RFC Editor's Queue
> > >=========================
> > >
> > >Requirements for Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies
> > >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Draft is moving through the "RFC Ed Queue" - seems close to being
> > published:
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-requirement 
> s-13.txt>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-requirements-13.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Services
> > >------------------------------------------
> > >Draft has moved to the "RFC Ed Queue" as of 8/21/07:
> > ><http://www.cs.columbia.edu/sip/draft/service/draft-ietf-ecrit-se 
> rvice-urn-07.txt>http://www.cs.columbia.edu/sip/draft/service/draft-ietf-ecrit-service-urn-07.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >Security Threats and Requirements for Emergency Call Marking and Mapping
> > >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >The new (-05) Draft version has moved to the "RFC Ed Queue" as of
> > 9/12/07.
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-security-th 
> reats-05.txt>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-security-threats-05.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >PROTO Documents
> > >===============
> > >
> > >The document shepherding process is described in:
> > ><http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherdin 
> g-07.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-07.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol
> > >------------------------------------------------
> > >PROTO writeup has been sent to the Area Directors and the IESG to
> > >complete the work.
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-06.txt 
>  >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-06.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >Location-to-URL Mapping Architecture and Framework
> > >--------------------------------------------------
> > >PROTO WRITEUP has been sent to the Area Directors and the IESG to
> > >complete work.
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-mapping-arc 
> h-02.txt>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-mapping-arch-02.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >A Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) based Location-to-Service
> > >Translation Protocol (LoST) Discovery Procedure
> > >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >PROTO WRITEUP has been sent to the Area Directors and the IESG to
> > >complete work.
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-di 
> scovery-02.txt>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-discovery-02.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >Other WG Drafts
> > >===============
> > >
> > >The (two) remaining ECRIT WG Drafts, below, have been updated.
> > >
> > >Framework for Emergency Calling using Internet Multimedia
> > >---------------------------------------------------------
> > >New Draft version published as of 9/19/07.  Needs additional WG review.
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-framework-0 
> 3.txt>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-framework-03.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >Best Current Practice for Communications Services in support of
> > >Emergency Calling
> > >----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ----------------
> > >
> > >New Draft version published as of 9/19/07.  Needs additional WG review.
> > ><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-02 
> .txt>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-02.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Individual Drafts
> > >=================
> > >
> > >Location Hiding: Problem Statement and Requirements
> > >---------------------------------------------------
> > >An updated draft has been produced, see:
> > ><http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-location- 
> hiding-requirements-01.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-location-hiding-requirements-01.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >Last action on this was: "Initiate discussion after the main WG
> > >items have been progressed."
> > >
> > >Action: ECRIT chairs to determine level of effort, since other items
> > >now progressed.
> > >
> > >Extensions to the Emergency Services Architecture for dealing with
> > >Unauthenticated and Unauthorized Devices
> > >----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---------------------
> > >
> > >Initial draft version has been submitted.
> > ><http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-unauthent 
> icated-access-00.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-unauthenticated-access-00.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >There is a IEEE liaison msg. which references the above draft, see:
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04361.htm 
> l>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04361.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Emergency Call Marking
> > >----------------------
> > > From last report, it was stated:
> > >"The initially assumed solution,
> > ><http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sip/draft-rosenberg-sip-ua-loose-route- 
> 01.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sip/draft-rosenberg-sip-ua-loose-route-01.txt,
> > >
> > >was not accepted at the IETF meeting."
> > >
> > >Some discussion has taken place entitled "UA Loose Routing", see:
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04308.htm 
> l>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04308.html
> > >
> > >
> > >And "call marking", see:
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04310.htm 
> l>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04310.html
> > >
> > >Which Richard reintroduced, and which there appears to be no common
> > >resolution for yet, see Brian's response on probable action by most
> > >proxies, see:
> > >
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04319.htm 
> l>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04319.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Proxy Authentication of the Emergency Status of SIP Calls
> > >---------------------------------------------------------
> > > From last report, it was stated,
> > >"A lot of the discussions in the last few weeks focused on
> > ><http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-barnes-ecrit-auth-00.txt>ht 
> tp://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-barnes-ecrit-auth-00.txt
> > >
> > >Action Item: Summary needs to be compiled."
> > >
> > >Action: Need to determine next steps.
> > >
> > >Overview of the IETF Emergency Services Architecture
> > >----------------------------------------------------
> > >Restated from the last report:
> > >"The following document gives an overview of the emergency services
> > >architecture:
> > ><http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-tschofenig-ecrit-architectu 
> re-overview-00.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ecrit/draft-tschofenig-ecrit-architecture-overview-00.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >It is meant to be read by members from other SDOs and regulators."
> > >
> > >DSL Forum Documents
> > >-------------------
> > >
> > >The following referenced document were made available from the DSL
> > >Forum.  An initial review was made by Hannes Tschofenig, see:
> > >
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04320.htm 
> l>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg04320.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Additional comments have been logged to the list, see:
> > ><http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/mail3.html>h 
> ttp://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/mail3.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Alignment between IETF and 3GPP Emergency Services Architecture
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > From the last report,
> > >"[Hannes]... has the action item to schedule a conference
> > >call within the IETF ECRIT WG and subsequently between IETF ECRIT
> > >and the 3GPP to discuss a possible alignment."
> > >
> > >3rd SDO Emergency Services Workshop
> > >-----------------------------------
> > >
> > >The next workshop (ESW03-07) is scheduled for a 3 day meeting (October
> > 30st -
> > >November 1st) in Brussels/Belgium (3 day mtg.).
> > >
> > >Meeting information can be found here:
> > ><http://www.emergency-services-coordination.info/2007Nov/>http:// 
> www.emergency-services-coordination.info/2007Nov/
> > >
> > >
> > >A first version of the agenda is also available:
> > ><https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/es-coordination/2007-Aug 
> ust/000050.html>https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/es-coordination/2007-August/000050.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Tuesday, October 30:
> > >--------
> > >
> > >Tutorials about IETF, 3GPP and NENA architectures
> > >
> > >u2010 meeting the standards
> > >
> > >Wednesday, October 31:
> > >----------
> > >
> > >Policy Panel
> > >
> > >Status Updates
> > >         *  IETF (GEOPRIV, ECRIT, SIP)
> > >         * DSL Forum
> > >         * IEEE
> > >         * ATIS-ESIF
> > >         * NENA
> > >         * ETSI EMTEL
> > >         * 3GPP
> > >         * 3GPP2
> > >         * ETSI TISPAN
> > >         * FCC
> > >         * Open Mobile Alliance (OMA)
> > >         * TIA
> > >         * US Department of Transportation
> > >         * OCG
> > >         * EU Commission
> > >         * Wimax Forum
> > >         * WiFi Forum/Alliance
> > >         * APCO Project 41
> > >         * COMCAST
> > >         * NIST
> > >
> > >Thursday, November 1:
> > >---------
> > >
> > >Status Updates (con't)
> > >
> > >Authority-to-Citizen Communication
> > >         Requirements
> > >         What's available now
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Ecrit mailing list
> > >[e-mail]
> > ><https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>https://www1.ietf.o 
> rg/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> > >
> > >
> > >Roger Marshall
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or
> > >confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, or responsible
> > >for delivering this message to the intended recipient, any review,
> > >forwarding, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> > >communication or any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you
> > >have received this message in error, please so notify the sender
> > >immediately, and delete it and all attachments from your computer and
> > network.
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Ecrit mailing list
> > >[e-mail]
> > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit