[ITU+IETF] comments on workshop issue 7 (E.212 IMSIs ...) - long
Andrew.Gallant@comsat.com Tue, 08 February 2000 19:48 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA09304 for <itu+ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:48:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA24996 for <itu+ietf-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:46:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA09297; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:48:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA24973; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:46:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA24953 for <itu+ietf@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:46:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cqmx.corp.comsat.com (cqmx.corp.comsat.com [134.133.184.25]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA09294 for <itu+ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:47:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Andrew.Gallant@comsat.com
Received: from cqgate5.cmc.comsat.com ([134.133.162.20]) by cqmx.corp.comsat.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-0U10L2S100V35) with ESMTP id com; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:47:09 -0500
Received: from ccMail by cqgate5.cmc.comsat.com (IMA Internet Exchange 3.13) id 0000A3F3; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 14:47:36 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 14:47:21 -0800
Message-ID: <0000A3F3.C22277@comsat.com>
To: itu+ietf@ietf.org
Cc: "Ash; Gerald R (Jerry); ALARC" <gash@att.com>, Emad Qaddoura <emadq@nortelnetworks.com>, Haseeb Akhtar <haseeb@nortelnetworks.com>, Mohamed Khalil <mkhalil@nortelnetworks.com>, Raja Narayanan <raja@nortelnetworks.com>, "Shaw; Robert" <Robert.Shaw@itu.int>, "'fredgaechter@monmouth.com'" <fredgaechter@monmouth.com>, "Tar; John" <John.Tar@itu.int>, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [ITU+IETF] comments on workshop issue 7 (E.212 IMSIs ...) - long
Sender: itu+ietf-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: itu+ietf-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Joint ITU+IETF Discussion List <itu+ietf.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: itu+ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This is a set of comments on Workshop Issue 7 (E.212 IMSIs ...), and consists of: - description, - search results, - information on E.212, and - other comments. 1. From the Workshop Report, the description of Issue 7 is: - Issue #: 7 - Issue Title: E.212 - IMSIs & mobility with IP - Issue Description: In IETF documents, IMSI's are mentioned but ITU-T Rec E.212 is not often referenced. A review of the IETF documents is needed to ensure that the appropriate use of the term IMSI is used. - Related Work: Rec. E.212 Rec. E.214 3GPP 3GPP2 - Responsible Forum: IETF 2. Internet Drafts and RFCs were searched for mentions of E.212 and IMSIs. The search results were: - For E.212: 2 Internet Drafts 0 RFCs - For IMSI: 6 Internet Drafts 1 RFC (current The Internet Drafts mentioning E.212 were: - SS7 over internet applicability statement (draft-coene-ss7-over-ip-00.txt) and - Internet and SS7 addressing (draft-coene-ss7-IP-addr-00.txt). The Internet Drafts mentioning IMSI were: - Transparent Hierarchical Mobility Agents (THEMA) (draft-mccann-thema-00.txt) - Support of IPv6 over Cellular Communications Systems (6Tel) (draft-afifi-sixtel-00.txt) - IP Mobility Architecture Framework (draft-ietf-mobileip-ipm-arch-00.txt) - IP Mobility Architecture Framework (draft-becker-mobileip-ipm-arch-00.txt) - Key Exchange for Network Architectures (KENA) (draft-mkhalil-mobileip-kena-00.txt) - Mobile PPP (MPPP) (draft-ietf-pppext-mppp-01.txt) The RFC mentioning IMSI was: Wireless Device Configuration (OTASP/OTAPA) via ACAP (RFC2636). 3. Recommendation E.212 was revised by ITU-T Study Group 2 in 1998. The title is "THE INTERNATIONAL IDENTIFICATION PLAN FOR MOBILE TERMINALS AND MOBILE USERS." The revision reflects the more general scope of the term IMSI ("international mobile subscriber identity" -- formerly known as the "international mobile station identity") and what IMSIs could be used for. The "Table of Contents and Summary of Recommendation E.212 (11/98)" may be found at "http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/rec/e/s_e212.html". The summary is": "A plan for unique international identification of mobile terminals and mobile users is required in order to enable these terminals and users to roam among public networks which offer mobility services. International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) is required so that a visited network can identify a roaming mobile terminal or mobile user, e.g. in order to query a subscriber's home network for subscription and billing information. "Recommendation E.190 describes the general principles to be utilized in the assignment of ITU-T E-series international numbering resources. The procedures in this Recommendation, E.212, were developed in accordance with the principles contained in Recommendation E.190, and the statements contained in Recommendation E.190 take precedence over Recommendation E.212." The scope of E.212 is: "This Recommendation describes an international identification plan for mobile terminals or mobile users of public networks enabling roaming capabilities. It also establishes procedures for the assignment of International Mobile Subscriber Identities (IMSIs) to the mobile terminals and mobile users of such networks. This Recommendation describes the format of the IMSI." It is also noted there that: "an IMSI could be used to identify a UPT user or a subscriber to mobility services, as well as to identify a mobile terminal." A reference to E.212 from the ITU web site is: "[E.212] Recommendation E.212 (11/98) - The international identification plan for mobile terminals and mobile users." 4. Other comments: a. As Fred Baker said in an email, "... fundamentally, I think the ITU folks wanted to make sure that IETF use of "IMSI" and theirs correspond ...". I agree. b. The revisions to E.212 may be of interest to the IETF. c. I am not aware of any other Workshop-related issues for E.212 except for referencing the current version of the document. d. I am not aware of issues relevant to E.214, at least in ITU-T SG2, and there's not been any recent work on it there. Perhaps whoever suggested adding E.214 to the Related Work section of the Workshop matrix could identify if there are any issues that do fall within the Workshop's focus on Numbering, Naming, Addressing, and Routing. -Andy Gallant _______________________________________________ ITU+IETF mailing list ITU+IETF@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/itu+ietf
- [ITU+IETF] comments on workshop issue 7 (E.212 IM… Andrew.Gallant
- [ITU+IETF] comments on workshop issue 7 (E.212 IM… Andrew.Gallant
- [ITU+IETF] Re: comments on workshop issue 7 (E.21… Fred Baker
- Fwd: [ITU+IETF] comments on workshop issue 7 (E.2… Fred Baker