Re: [paws] Protocol Action: 'Protocol to Access White-Space (PAWS) Databases' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-paws-protocol-20.txt)

<> Tue, 11 November 2014 06:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9315A1AD551; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:03:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.018
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.981, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R93KV4sHKveq; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:03:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 776F41AD554; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:03:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id d1so555813wiv.9 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:03:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:importance:date :in-reply-to:references:content-type; bh=o36NLWtGkqx2xG2YL7c8uKe2O9yjzHwl7BZxTvMevks=; b=fKGR8ii1rnWn7feJlJrk06G/om69VfZDCpRZD7EiDvYLlVxa7khKegUWGba9TKmhs+ hyTwJAlZfI+35MWdvFRNUjy6fWiHoMDp1+r1kwVR5p2Z/JzwKSFrMuldg29H0lWlDuuw 1f5OC8BtqYUGBFxKBqrTCnql+CsIrk9b9gNLtz4GkrAQVtBSHWZiYuTRPtZwyFWX6Oo/ XxH2yRTGAJe3mc92Nl+wRCafWrZg+GUwhmSYveYi0oBdb3J6Uf0S3YE+wk5Twyjn07+o 4TRrT9KuHfLT4hIWpq6HL35rL+pUMANg8u1fY9seiURt/bqzzlUNAWOSXsEKrMtOvtF9 ChDA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id e4mr36931220wiy.42.1415685802273; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:03:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Dell ([]) by with ESMTPSA id fa16sm16063346wid.5.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:03:21 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: <>
To: =?utf-8?Q?IETF-Announce?= <>, =?utf-8?Q?The_IESG?= <>
Importance: Normal
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:00:49 +0000
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_BC52F4C2-CE8C-4648-803D-01382128ABCB_"
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?paws_mailing_list?= <>, =?utf-8?Q?paws_chair?= <>, =?utf-8?Q?RFC_Editor?= <>
Subject: Re: [paws] =?utf-8?q?Protocol_Action=3A_=27Protocol_to_Access_White-S?= =?utf-8?q?pace_=28PAWS=29_Databases=27_to_Proposed_Standard_=28draft-ietf?= =?utf-8?q?-paws-protocol-20=2Etxt=29?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Protocol to Access White Space database \(PAWS\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:03:25 -0000

Hello All,

It is good to see this big step on this emerging area.



Researcher, University of Dodoma

Tanzania, East Africa.

Sent from Windows Mail

From: The IESG
Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎November‎ ‎11‎, ‎2014 ‎5‎:‎49‎ ‎AM
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: paws mailing list; paws chair; RFC Editor

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Protocol to Access White-Space (PAWS) Databases'
  (draft-ietf-paws-protocol-20.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Protocol to Access WS database
Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Pete Resnick and Barry Leiba.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Technical Summary

   Portions of the radio spectrum that are allocated to licensees are
   available for non-interfering use.  This available spectrum is called
   "White Space."  Allowing secondary users access to available spectrum
   "unlocks" existing spectrum to maximize its utilization and to
   provide opportunities for innovation, resulting in greater overall
   spectrum utilization.

   One approach to manage spectrum sharing uses databases to report
   spectrum availability to devices.  To achieve interoperability among
   multiple devices and databases, a standardized protocol must be
   defined and implemented.  This document defines such a protocol, the
   "Protocol to Access White Space (PAWS) Databases".
Working Group Summary

   During the design of the protocol, in earlier phases, there was some
   controversy, even deadlock at some point over a few points. But
   issues got addressed, and for the last 3 versions of the document
   there were no comments indicating any controversy. There were
   significant comments during AD Review and Last Call that have
   also been addressed to the satisfaction of the reviewers, and a
   second Last Call took place to confirm.

Document Quality

   During private conversations, several mailing list members indicated
   that they have an implementation of a version of the protocol, but
   none came forward publicly with their implementations yet, and there
   was no request to hold an interop event.


   Gabor Bajko <>; is the shepherd.
   Pete Resnick <>; is the AD.

paws mailing list