RE: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPREP charter
"GOLDMAN, STUART O \(STUART\)" <sgoldman@lucent.com> Sun, 18 June 2006 00:41 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FrlLg-00014p-8o; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:41:08 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FrlLe-00014k-FI for ieprep@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:41:06 -0400
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com ([135.245.0.39]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FrlLd-0002zt-VP for ieprep@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 20:41:06 -0400
Received: from ilexp02.ndc.lucent.com (h135-3-39-2.lucent.com [135.3.39.2]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.6/IER-o) with ESMTP id k5I0f3ho028056; Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:41:03 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ILEXC1U01.ndc.lucent.com ([135.3.39.3]) by ilexp02.ndc.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:41:02 -0500
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPREP charter
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:41:01 -0500
Message-ID: <7A5EF92F6D86BD419418FFBD69E882B654D124@ILEXC1U01.ndc.lucent.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPREP charter
Thread-Index: AcaOPbBA39jgZ6UgR1WELGL7/BzMigEMUdGQ
From: "GOLDMAN, STUART O (STUART)" <sgoldman@lucent.com>
To: "King, Kimberly S." <KIMBERLY.S.KING@saic.com>, ieprep@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jun 2006 00:41:02.0932 (UTC) FILETIME=[E054D940:01C6926F]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 71f780ffdd80c541d3e75aa5f2710d3d
Cc:
X-BeenThere: ieprep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Emergency Preparedness Working Group <ieprep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ieprep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org
Kimberly, Kimberly, Given the vital importance of emergency communications during disasters as described below, it certainly seems that the IEPREP group is still needed. I have no improvements to the draft charter you have proposed. Stuart Goldman Lucent Technologies sgoldman@lucent.com 602 493 8438 -----Original Message----- From: King, Kimberly S. [mailto:KIMBERLY.S.KING@saic.com] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:30 AM To: ieprep@ietf.org Subject: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPREP charter We were asked to tighten up the potential new charter. Here is a start. Comments? ________________________ Internet Emergency Preparedness (ieprep) Charter Description of Working Group: Effective telecommunications capabilities are imperative to facilitate immediate recovery operations for serious emergency events including natural disasters (e.g., hurricanes, floods, earthquakes) and those created by man (e.g., terrorist attacks, combat situations or wartime events). In addition, related capabilities should be operative in normal command and control operations of military services, which often have timeliness requirements even in peacetime. Disasters can happen any time, any place, unexpectedly. Quick response for recovery operations requires immediate access to any telecommunications capabilities at hand. These capabilities include: conventional telephone, cellular phones, and Internet access via online terminals, IP telephones, and wireless PDAs. The commercial telecommunications infrastructure is rapidly evolving to Internet-based technology. Therefore, the Internet community needs to consider how it can best support emergency management and recovery operations. The IEPREP WG will address proactive measures to congestion and recovery from various outages using three perspectives: 1. A commercial (i.e., or public) telecommunications infrastructure 2. An enterprise or governmental/military telecommunications infrastructure that retains sole administration of its own network resources 3. A governmental/military telecommunications infrastructure that combines private resources and leverages public infrastructure. Now that the initial documents describing the broad problem space and its salient characteristics have been completed, new efforts will focus on specific requirements and solutions, such as those pertaining to the governmental/military sector. The following are specific examples that can satisfy the interests of governmental/military (and potentially, commercial/public/enterprise) emergency communications: 1. Under emergency circumstances, some countries require civil networks to distinguish sessions based on the user's indication of precedence. The network can use the precedence information to give priority to some sessions over others, up to and including preemption of lower-precedence sessions. In many countries' governmental networks, the capabilities needed to support precedence-based preferential treatment are requirements on the equipment and services used to build those networks. As Internet-based technology continues to expand into civil and government networks, requirements for precedence-based capabilities will need to be developed. IEPREP will document these requirements as they pertain to technologies of interest to IETF. 2. Specific countries may have additional considerations that define the context in which they implement session precedence and preemption. For example, network ownership constraints (which may differ from commercial deployments), communities of interest including dial-plan considerations, encryption assumptions and any limitations arising from differing security levels, etc. that should be described before mechanisms can be proposed. IEPREP should document the context for implementing solutions. In addition, specific solutions must be developed when appropriate. 3. While voice was the driving application for IEPREP in the past, preferential treatments will need to be applied to all applications essential to emergency communications. Preferential treatment must address robustness of both voice and non-real-time applications that share the same infrastructure. The IEPREP WG should document the preferential treatment mechanisms that are appropriate for any essential communications. In the IETF, considerations for treatment and security of emergency communications stretch across a number of working groups, mostly in the RAI Area, notably including the various voice/video signaling working groups, instant messaging, and QoS signaling. IEPREP will cooperate closely with these groups and with those outside of the IETF such as various ITU-T study groups. In addition, IEPREP will pursue subject matter experts (e.g., security) for specification review if such expertise does not exist within the working group in order to ensure continued high quality specifications. If there is an existing group that can extend a protocol or mechanism, IEPREP will generate only a requirements document for those groups to evaluate. If there is not an existing group that can extend a protocol or mechanism, IEPREP will prepare requirements and discuss the extension of that protocol/mechanism or protocols/mechanisms within IEPREP. Goals and Milestones: Done Submit initial I-D of Requirements Done Submit initial I-D of Framework Done Submit initial I-D of Recommendations BCP Done Produce an Requirements I-D to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC Done Submit Framework I-D to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC Aug 06 Submit an initial I-D of Requirements of Government/Military Networks for Precedence and Preemption Aug 06 Submit an initial I-D of ETS Terminology. This document should define ieprep related terms (e.g., ETS, GETS, MLPP) and explain their relationships and how they have been used in existing RFCs Sept 06 Submit an initial I-D of Deployment Considerations of Precedence and Preemption on Government/Military Networks. This document should clarify the context that Government/Military requirements must operate. Nov 06 Submit final I-D of Requirements of Government/Military Networks for Precedence and Preemption to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC NOV 06 Submit final I-D of ETS Terminology to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. Jan 07 Submit an final I-D of Deployment Considerations of Precedence and Preemption on Government/Military Networks to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. Feb 07 Submit an initial I-D of Mechanisms for Precedence and Preemption to be used by Government/Military Networks Apr 07 Submit final I-D of Mechanisms for Precedence and Preemption to be used by Government/Military Networks to IESG for publication as a BCP Apr 07 The working group will discuss re-chartering if additional efforts are agreed upon by the WG (for example, work items related to protocols outside existing WGs). _______________________________________________ Ieprep mailing list Ieprep@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep _______________________________________________ Ieprep mailing list Ieprep@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep
- [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPREP ch… King, Kimberly S.
- Re: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPRE… James M. Polk
- RE: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPRE… GOLDMAN, STUART O (STUART)
- Re: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPRE… ken carlberg
- RE: [Ieprep] Another version of a potential IEPRE… Perschau, Stephen CIV NCS NC2
- RESEND RE: [Ieprep] Another version of a potentia… Perschau, Stephen CIV NCS NC2
- Re: RESEND RE: [Ieprep] Another version of a pote… Janet P Gunn