Re: [stir] current draft charter

How is this n the scope of this charter, Jon...can we focus

-----Original Message-----
From: stir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:stir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peterson, Jon
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 2:00 PM
To: Dan York; Hadriel Kaplan
Cc: stir@ietf.org; dcrocker@bbiw.net
Subject: Re: [stir] current draft charter

I hear what you're saying, but I'd imagine there will always be a
difference in time-frame between "speeding up the web" and waiting for a
human to pick up a phone. Humans have to react to altering, get their
phone out of a pocket, etc. Nothing about how much faster we make the web
will reduce the distance (physical and psychological) between my pool and
my phone charger when a call comes in.

Now, what if we hope to make the phone never ring at all? The potential
laziness of callees is meaningful because only the caller perceives the
delay. Certainly we can play alerting back to the caller even if the
callee phone is trying to resolve authorization. In fact, in many blocking
circumstances, continuing to play alerting forever might be the right
thing to do if the callee is declining the caller.

Ultimately we are going to have to have some estimate of what the budget
is here and match it against what we hope to accomplish.

Jon Peterson
Neustar, Inc.

On 6/17/13 10:27 AM, "Dan York" <york@isoc.org> wrote:

>On 6/17/13 2:18 AM, "Hadriel Kaplan" <hadriel.kaplan@oracle.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On Jun 16, 2013, at 7:27 PM, "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> The exact amount of tolerable delay is a very interesting dimension of
>>> this problem space. I suspect we have a considerable amount of time,
>>>given
>>> all the human expectations about both post-dial delay and the wait for
>>> someone to pick up after altering. I think it's enough time to perform
>>> some non-trivial operations.
>>
>>I've been thinking about that and I'm not sure we actually have much
>>time. 
>
>+1.  As we as a society move more systems from the PSTN over to "IP
>communications" I suspect that we will see a growing expectation to have
>connections occur more quickly.  Other factors may enter in here, too, in
>feeding that expectation.  For instance, we may see WebRTC apps that
>quickly connect a calling user with another endpoint, and users may grow
>to expect that kind of quick connection.  Or there may be a new IP-based
>telco that attempts to differentiate itself by providing the fastest
>connection time.  Or there may be a major vendor that launches a campaign
>for IP communications like Google's "Speed Up The Web" that is aimed at
>providing quicker connections.
>
>I think you are right, Jon, based on *current* human expectations, but I
>could easily see those expectations changing and I think we need to be
>careful about tying a solution to current expectations. (Or at least if we
>do that needs to be a conscious choice.)
>
>>Anecdotally, I find that intra-nation calls get to ringing stage much
>>faster than international calls, so people are probably ok with
>>international caller-id verification taking longer.
>
>Agreed, based again on *current* expectations around user behavior.  On
>the other hand, when I make a call using Skype or Facetime I expect the
>call to connect quickly. With some other apps browser-based apps I expect
>to be able to pretty much push the button to initiate a call and start
>talking.
>
>I think we need to plan for the success of communication moving over to IP
>and reaping some of the benefits of IP, including no longer being shackled
>to legacy PSTN behavior.
>
>My 2 cents,
>Dan
>

_______________________________________________
stir mailing list
stir@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir