Re: [Ecrit] IETF ECRIT Design Team on Premature Call Termination

["Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ted, 

>>* At the same time we create a design team in ECRIT to work on 
>>"Premature Call Termination".
>
>This seems to me to presume a fundamental requirement and to 
>define the terms in a way that isn't appropriate.
>Can we define the deliverables, to clear this up?  For 
>example, could the design team reasonably determine that call 
>termination in SIP-based systems was fundamentally different 
>from the wireline and that wireline models of what "premature" 
>meant did not apply?  Or does this presume the Canadian 
>requirements as a new, global requirement?  Or does this 
>include some negotiation phase requirement that didn't exist before?


We obviously have to discuss terminology, if that's your concern. 

>
>>Depending on the progress of the design team we are able to 
>incorporate 
>>the results of it into the document (even at a fairly late 
>stage of the 
>>document process). If the design team does not produce results then 
>>anything that comes out of it can be seen as an extension to 
>the Phone 
>>BCP document.
>
>Any design team document that does not go through the full 
>IETF process can expect an appeal.  This isn't the role of 
>design teams--they make proposals to a working group, which 
>then has every opportunity to review them as it would any other input.
>The same is true for IETF Last Call review.  Assuming that the 
>results of this can be incorporated into a document that has 
>already passed IESG review without updating that document and 
>going through the process is just not how things work.

I know the process. Don't worry. 


>
>>We need members for the design team! We have already received the 
>>commitment of folks from NENA but we also need some guys from 
>the ECRIT 
>>group. Who is interested in participating?
>
>Sorry, maybe I have misunderstood this totally.  How do you 
>have volunteers from NENA for an IETF document without having 
>announced the need before today?  Are you planning this as a 
>design team to help NENA define a requirement in its own 
>documents?  Or is this meant to produce an IETF document?  If 
>a NENA document, my discussion of design teams is off-base, 
>and I apologize, but it would be useful to identify the target here.
>			thanks,
>				Ted
I thought it would be sensible to involve folks from NENA since the
issue came up there.
I want to make sure that key players from both groups are present. This
is important to make some progress. 

Does my response help? 

Ciao
Hannes

>
>
>
>>Ciao
>>Hannes & Marc
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Ecrit mailing list
>>[e-mail]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ecrit mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>
_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit