Re: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether?
"Mary Barnes" <mary.barnes@nortel.com> Mon, 18 August 2008 16:22 UTC
Return-Path: <sipping-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sipping-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sipping-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E103A6D3C; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: sipping@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipping@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F47D3A6A6E for <sipping@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:22:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.338
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.338 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.261, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 8r100XHFBfIX for <sipping@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:22:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zcars04e.nortel.com (zcars04e.nortel.com [47.129.242.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE3528C194 for <sipping@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:21:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zrc2hxm1.corp.nortel.com (zrc2hxm1.corp.nortel.com [47.103.123.72]) by zcars04e.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id m7IGJaj06616; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:19:36 GMT
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:19:15 -0500
Message-ID: <F66D7286825402429571678A16C2F5EE04E80DE1@zrc2hxm1.corp.nortel.com>
In-Reply-To: <160DE07A1C4F8E4AA2715DEC577DA491B1AB4B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether?
thread-index: AckBTGAO0ZbG/4xLQBeZtedcWfKr0QAAB+IA
References: <160DE07A1C4F8E4AA2715DEC577DA491B1AB4B@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com>
From: Mary Barnes <mary.barnes@nortel.com>
To: Daryl Malas <D.Malas@cablelabs.com>, sipping@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether?
X-BeenThere: sipping@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "SIPPING Working Group \(applications of SIP\)" <sipping.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/sipping>
List-Post: <mailto:sipping@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: sipping-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sipping-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Daryl, Did you have a chance to look at the minutes of the IETF-72 SIPPING WG session? http://www.softarmor.com/sipping/meets/ietf72/notes/sipping-72-minutes.t xt The folks involved are working as aggressively as possible (given the limitations of the people involved and relative to other work in the RAI area) and have all invested a significant amount of time in the activity over the past couple of years - . I can give you lots of examples of other very important work in terms of the industry that has progressed far more slowly. We do need to progress in a logical manner, which is why the model and design considerations document is important. Given my experience, in most cases when we've fast tracked things to the SIP WG, we've gotten stuck in the mode of folks actually not agreeing some of the fundamentals. So, I personally think it's very important that this is done right and in consultation with the right experts - industry and IETF (e.g., TSV). >From my personal experience with the vendor community, you are right that folks are already implementing solutions, but I honestly don't think that we're nearly as far behind as we've been in other areas in the past and most folks I've talked to recognize the importance of doing this right - this isn't just a header or event package involved - the models and when folks make use of the headers, etc. is really far more important. So, perhaps, this may sound like an excuse, but I think the folks involved are doing the best they can and from a process perspective. One of the best ways to get this work done more quickly is for folks to provide constructive feedback on the documents - i.e., the one that we've just agreed as a WG document, so I will take your message as an indicator of your volunteering to be a reviewer for this doc when the -00 is submitted. It's also imperative for folk help us complete the other work items more quickly. This really means paying attention and thinking through things early on rather than waiting until work is getting ready to leave the WG to make comments (and in many cases reverse past WG consensus), which has been the mode of operation for several of the RAI WGs many of us are involved in. So, if folks believe this work is really important, please volunteer as a reviewer and please help us complete other key industry deliverables such as the profile-dataset work. Regards, Mary. --mostly as SIPPING WG chair, other than when I used the term "personal" or "personally". -----Original Message----- From: sipping-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sipping-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Daryl Malas Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:07 AM To: sipping@ietf.org Subject: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether? All, I am a little concerned based on the decisions made in the Sipping WG session in Dublin regarding the overload work. If we take a look back this problem was first brought up in the working group in February 2006 (nearly 2.5 years ago) (draft-rosenberg-sipping-overload-reqs-00). The first draft (draft-hilt-sipping-hopbyhop-overload-00) providing a potential track towards a solution was introduced in June 2006. Then, the working group decided to create a design team to look into the problem and come up with a solid feedback mechanism and prove the mechanism worked by describing potential solutions. This design team has been meeting at least since February 2007. At IETF 70 (Vancouver), the design team reported some significant improvements to the overload problem using some unique algorithms provided by members of the team. Now, fast forward to IETF 72 in Dublin, Volker introduced a new draft (draft-hilt-sipping-overload-design-00) based on the work of the design team. I believe (correct me if I am wrong) the response from the working group and working group chairs was: - The design team should keep working on a "non-working group item" as it is important - Identify a control and feedback mechanism - Do NOT come up with any solutions for the problem - Continue to provide feedback of work to the working group (for how long?) I think we are missing the point related to this draft across the industry. When a problem such as this is introduced into the IETF, it is introduced because the problem *exists* across the industry. The industry essentially is asking for the IETF to *solve* the problem....or, come up with an industry standard "solution" to the problem. This way, whether I am using vendor x, y, or z; all of them will understand and react to overload control in a similar manner to provide the most optimal throughput. (I am not saying enhancements/improvements may not be vendor specific ("Our solution is better than vendor "y's", because it provides...blah."), but at least there is a baseline solution that can be standardized across the industry.) IMO, here is what will occur based on this response (and, is probably already occurring). Vendors and SSPs will come up with there own solutions to the problem. When the IETF finally releases something to the industry, either no one will implement it (already using vendor solutions x, y, and/or z), or it will be completely obsolete because some other solution (e.g. SBC session limiting functionality) has resolved (while maybe non-optimally) the problem. I just wanted to provide some feedback and encourage the Sipping WG and the overload design team to continue working aggressively to provide a mechanism to report overload and a baseline solution to resolve it, or provide a statement describing why the problem does not (or should not) exist. Regards, Daryl ---------------- Daryl Malas CableLabs (o) +1 303 661 3302 (f) +1 303 661 9199 mailto:d.malas@cablelabs.com _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP
- [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether? Daryl Malas
- Re: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether? Daryl Malas
- Re: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether? Mary Barnes
- Re: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether? Mary Barnes
- Re: [Sipping] Overload work...lost in the ether? Daryl Malas