Minutes, SIPPING WG, 61th IETF

Minutes edited by Gonzalo Camarillo

Session 1, Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 0900-1130

Meeting chaired by Gonzalo Camarillo, Rohan Mahy, and Dean Willis
Notes by Ben Campbell and Spencer Dawkins

Topic: Status
Discussions led by: Chairs

Chairs do not want to run too many working group last calls in parallel. The end-to-middle security work is scheduled for December, the conferencing bundle (four drafts) for January, and the URI-list services documents for February/March.
3GPP needs the conferencing document by December (January would probably be OK as well).

Topic: Configuration
Discussions led by: Dan Petrie
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework-04.txt and draft-petrie-sipping-profile-datasets-00.txt

The configuration framework should work for low-end devices, but the datasets mechanism may not be supported by that type of device.
The framework should not be very complex (e.g., rules to resolve conflicts in configuration date received from different sources may get too complex). We need to work on some use cases. think about requirements, and keep things as simple as possible. In particular, we need to think realistically about what low-end devices will need.

Topic: Session-Independent Policies
Discussions led by: Volker Hilt
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-session-indep-policy-01.txt

No significant discussions on the proposals in the slides. If somebody has any objection, he or she should express them on the list.

Topic: Session-Specific Policies
Discussions led by: Volker Hilt
Relevant documents: draft-hilt-sipping-session-spec-policy-01.txt

How does this work in a federation of domains? There is no communication between policy servers.
The mechanism should be as simple as possible. Having use cases would be a good idea.

Topic: URI-List Services
Discussions led by: Gonzalo Camarillo
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-uri-services-01.txt, draft-ietf-sipping-uri-list-conferencing-01.txt, draft-ietf-sipping-uri-list-message-01.txt, draft-ietf-sipping-uri-list-subscribe-01.txt, and draft-ietf-sipping-multiple-refer-01.txt

URI comparisons are performed following the rules of the appropriate URI schemes (e.g., SIP URIs are compared using the rules for SIP URI comparison).
Can user agents update the original URI-list provided to a conference server or to a resource list server in a SUBSCRIBE request. No, but future extensions may allow it. The drafts will be updated to reflect this.
Will the consent-framework be a MUST implement here? Allison will provide input here.
The disposition type of lists sent to user agents in MESSAGEs should be different than the disposition type of lists sent by user agents to URI-list services.

Topic: Consent
Discussions led by: Gonzalo Camarillo
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-consent-reqs-00.txt  and draft-ietf-sipping-consent-framework-00.txt

Do we want to mandate XCAP? We may not want to limit the applicability of this mechanism to user agents that support XCAP.
Regarding the schema for permission documents, we need to think of low-end devices, but also on high-end devices that want to generate complex permission documents.

Topic: Transfer
Discussions led by: Alan Johnston
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-cc-transfer-03.txt

How to correlate a REFERs sent out of dialog with GRUUs is still an issue. Once we resolve this, the document will be ready for WGLC.

Topic: End-to-middle Security
Discussions led by: Kumiko Ono
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-e2m-reqs-04.txt (currently under WGLC) and draft-ono-sipping-end2middle-security-03.txt

The mechanism is probably SIP work (not SIPPING).
What's the community interest in implementing this work? Significant but not overwhelming. Will be recommended to SIP via Allison.

Topic: Caller Preferences Use Cases
Discussions led by: Paul Kyzivat
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-callerprefs-usecases-03.txt

The draft is ready for WGLC

Topic: GRUU Extensions to the Reg Event Package
Discussions led by: Paul Kyzivat
Relevant documents: draft-kyzivat-sipping-gruu-reg-event-01.txt

Paul thinks the current draft has addressed all the open issues received to date, but not a lot of feedback has been received anyway. The draft needs more scrutiny.
Those who are implementing the reg package will most likely implement this draft (based on sense of the room).

Topic: Conferencing Framework
Discussions led by: Jonathan Rosenberg
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-conferencing-framework-03.txt (currently under WGLC)

Discussions on the scope of this draft and its relation with the XCON framework. Allison will provide input on this issue.


Session 2, Thursday, November 11, 2004, 900-1130

Meeting chaired by Gonzalo Camarillo, Rohan Mahy, and Dean Willis
Notes by Spencer Dawkins

Topic: Real-time Text over IP
Discussions led by: Arnoud van Wijk
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-ToIP-00.txt

Need to identify requirements for SIP extensions. It may be that everything in this document can be implemented with existing SIP mechanisms.

Topic: Location Conveyance
Discussions led by: James Polk
Relevant documents: draft-ietf-sipping-location-requirements-02.txt

The document will contain requirements and solutions (to meet some of the requirements at least). It will need to be decided whether the document stays in SIPPING or is sent to SIP.

Topic: Event Package for Floor-related Information
Discussions led by: Eunsook Kim
Relevant documents: draft-ekim-sipping-conf-floor-package-00.txt

Discussions will continue in XCON. More use cases are needed to understand the need of an alternative mechanism to fetch floor control information (BFCP already provides this information).

Topic: Event Package for Device Information
Discussions led by: Brijesh Kumar
Relevant documents: draft-rahman-sipping-device-info-01.txt

The authors will have a look at RFC 3259 (A Message Bus for Local Coordination) and at already existing event packages to see whether or not their requirements can be met with existing mechanisms.

Topic: SIP and SPAM
Discussions led by: Jonathan Rosenberg
Relevant documents: draft-rosenberg-sipping-spam-01.txt

Consensus in the room to make this draft a WG item. The chairs will talk to Allison.
Not clear if this will be a requirements document or a framework document. This will need to be decided.

Topic: Direct Transcoding
Discussions led by: Kang
Relevant documents: draft-taegyukang-sipping-transc-itg-00.txt

The transcoding work has not advanced during the last meetings because the WG decided to finish other items, which are somehow related to transcoding, before (e.g., URI-list services for INVITE, session policies). The transcoding work will be resumed pretty soon, and it will take into account this type of scenario (the transcofing framework, which is a SIPPING WG item, actually tackles this type of transcoding already). The authors of this draft will send requirements to the transcoding design team.

Topic: RTCP Summary Reports
Discussions led by: Amy Pendleton
Relevant documents: draft-johnston-sipping-rtcp-summary-04.txt

Consensus in the room to make this draft a WG item. The chairs will talk to Allison. The next revision of the draft will most likely be ready for WGLC.


Ad-Hoc Meeting on SBCs (Session Border Controllers), Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 1900-2100

Meeting chaired by Gonzalo Camarillo and Jonathan Rosenberg
Notes by Spencer Dawkins, Gaurav Kulshreshtha, and Steve Donovan

This Ad-hoc meeting was organized to understand what functions are performing existing SBCs. The idea is to understand the requirements that have led implementers to use this type of entity and see whether these requirements can be met in a more SIP-friendly way (e.g., without breaking end-to-end principles).

The requirements that came up during the discussions will be summarized in an Internet-Draft. At a later point it will be decided whether such a document turns into a survey document, requirements document, use cases... in any case, it seems valuable to have this type of information published.

This work will be initially handled in SIPPING (i.e., the SIPPING mailing list is the right place to have discussions on SBCs at this point). If it turns out that this work is wider than just SIP, the area directors will find a home for it.