Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP

Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Wed, 29 April 2009 02:30 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D1B3A6774 for <ecrit@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.285
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.285 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.647, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96]
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 gsJzCxu2iv9G for <ecrit@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc2-s18.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc2-s18.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.111.93]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4D33A6C12 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU137-W9 ([65.55.111.72]) by blu0-omc2-s18.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:31:57 -0700
Message-ID: <BLU137-W9848D2C6D7F5A86A39250936F0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_766509c7-c942-41a7-88f8-77d168f65240_"
X-Originating-IP: [131.107.0.103]
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
To: randy@qualcomm.com
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:31:57 -0700
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <p06240615c61d1f6977b2@[172.28.171.53]>
References: <C6177BF4.147ED%mlinsner@cisco.com><p0624080dc617d32a1604@[10.227.68.1 32]> <49F27637.7050201@bbn.com> <E51D5B15BFDEFD448F90BDD17D41CFF104A3430A@AHQEX1.andrew.com> <058701c9c5d0$53c5ef40$fb51cdc0$@net> <E51D5B15BFDEFD448F90BDD17D41CFF104A3430B@AHQEX1.andrew.com> <28B7C3AA2A7ABA4A841F11217ABE78D67590BD8E@FRMRSSXCHMBSB3.dc-m.alcatel- lucent.com> <p0624060ac61bfca58f3b@[172.28.171.53]> <49F6891E.7080706@bbn.com> <p06240612c61ce4288752@[172.28.171.53]> <49F74082.2080804@bbn.com> <BLU137-W272F3CA08488458EDF988A936E0@phx.gbl> <p06240615c61d1f6977b2@[172.28.171.53]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Apr 2009 02:31:57.0988 (UTC) FILETIME=[AB244E40:01C9C872]
Cc: ecrit@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:30:37 -0000

>Per the definition of an applicability statement, all of phonebcp can be considered to be one.

 

I think that is correct with respect to the "how" -- the document is all about how TSs may be applied. 

 

I'm not so sure about the "under what circumstances" part of it, though.  That seems to be the point under discussion.  

 

BTW, it is not only the cellular community that may have a point of view on that issue.  IEEE 802 has recently debated an Emergency Services PAR (see http://www.ieee802.org/21/email21/msg02957.html) that has been somewhat controversial.  

 

3.2  Applicability Statement (AS)

   An Applicability Statement specifies how, and under what
   circumstances, one or more TSs may be applied to support a particular
   Internet capability.  An AS may specify uses for TSs that are not
   Internet Standards, as discussed in Section 7.

   An AS identifies the relevant TSs and the specific way in which they
   are to be combined, and may also specify particular values or ranges
   of TS parameters or subfunctions of a TS protocol that must be
   implemented.  An AS also specifies the circumstances in which the use
   of a particular TS is required, recommended, or elective (see section
   3.3).