RE: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Wed, 30 June 2010 15:33 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE413A67E9; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.982
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.982 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.617, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 HiTVgn80Qhyy; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:33:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEF573A6A15; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,513,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="195953642"
Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 30 Jun 2010 11:33:27 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,513,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="477417872"
Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 30 Jun 2010 11:33:26 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:33:24 +0200
Message-ID: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A04022F4219@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinCs4ooaP7qczjOf_CMJB2tZg9XR9Ro5H-WWHK6@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3
Thread-Index: AcsYaEYFoTRFDNeFTEGpj7QmoZE2ywAAL8OA
References: <AANLkTintQWiM1BNi1Lz11i4AEUm4vnpFhHNRPRMs6ctG@mail.gmail.com><EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A04022F40FB@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <AANLkTinCs4ooaP7qczjOf_CMJB2tZg9XR9Ro5H-WWHK6@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
Cc: DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org>, IETF-Discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:33:25 -0000

It looks to me that one can imagine 'centralized' solutions which are
also based on reusing SIP related functionality developed in RAI. I
would rather not close such an option and allow the WG a window of
opportunity in which alternate solutions that could meet the same goals
can be presented.  

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 6:24 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: DISPATCH; IETF-Discussion list
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> The term peer to peer is intended to exclude mechanisms that 
> would use a central repository for the information:  This was 
> discussed in an earlier thread:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch/current/msg02027.html
> 
> In one sense it is a solution, however, in another sense it 
> is reusing SIP related functionality defined in RAI and thus 
> is in a similar vein as specifying the use of SIP in a charter.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mary.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) 
> <dromasca@avaya.com> wrote:
> >> The VIPR WG will address this problem by developing a peer to peer 
> >> based approach to finding domains that claim to be 
> responsible for a 
> >> given phone number and validation protocols to ensure a reasonable 
> >> likelihood that a given domain actually is responsible for 
> the phone 
> >> number.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Clarification question. What exactly means 'peer to peer 
> based approach'
> > and what kind of approaches are excluded by having this in 
> the charter.
> > Does 'approach' mean solution? If so why does a specific type of 
> > solution need to be agreed in the charter, while all we 
> have at hand 
> > at this point are individual contribution I-Ds that describe the 
> > 'problem statement and some possible starting points for solutions'?
> >
> > Thanks and Regards,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org
> >> [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mary Barnes
> >> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 8:38 PM
> >> To: DISPATCH
> >> Subject: [dispatch] VIPR - proposed charter version 3
> >>
> >
>