RAI Open Area Meeting IETF 81, Quebec - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

kay
rai open area meeting ietf 81 quebec n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
RAI Open Area Meeting IETF 81, Quebec PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
RAI Open Area Meeting IETF 81, Quebec

play fullscreen
1 / 16
Download Presentation
RAI Open Area Meeting IETF 81, Quebec
72 Views
Download Presentation

RAI Open Area Meeting IETF 81, Quebec

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. RAI Open Area MeetingIETF 81, Quebec Gonzalo Camarillo Robert Sparks

  2. Note Well • Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity is considered an "IETF Contribution". Such statements include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to: • The IETF plenary session • The IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG • Any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices • Any IETF working group or portion thereof • Any Birds of a Feather (BOF) session • The IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB • The RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function • All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 (updated by RFC 4879). • Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the context of this notice. • Please consult RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 for details. • A participant in any IETF activity is deemed to accept all IETF rules of process, as documented in Best Current Practices RFCs and IESG Statements. • A participant in any IETF activity acknowledges that written, audio and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the public.

  3. Administrative Tasks • Blue sheets • Two note takers • Jabber scribe

  4. Agenda • Surveyresultssofar of the process in RFC 5727 • Open discussion

  5. RFC5727 • Intended to improvehandling of new workproposals and easecompletion of worktaken on • Created the DISPATCH process • The wholearea as itsscope • WG Chartered in April 2009 • Firstofficialmeeting in July 2009 (IETF 75) • Updated the SIP Changepolicies • P-headersweredeprecated • Easierregistration of headerfields for experimentalorprivateuse • Informational RFC orexternaldocument • DesignatedExpert • Clearerregistration for eventpackages • RFC Required • DesignatedExpert

  6. DISPATCH Structure • Decisions on how to handleparticularworkproposalsare made in DISPATCH • The actualwork is executedelsewhere • As a WG, a BOF, an AD-sponsored RFC, ...

  7. DISPATCH Track Record • 1 Post BoF charter review (atoca) • 3 BoFs recommended (rtcweb, codec, e2md) • 2 Dispatched to existing WG • 9 New WG recommended (8 formed) • 2Progression as AD sponsored recommended • 4 No further work recommended (and several ongoing conversations)

  8. Dispatched • Existing working groups • Sound level indication (AVT) • Action referral using REFER (Splices) • AD sponsored • Reason in responses • SIP Forum User-Agent Config • No further IETF work recommended • Profile datasets • DTMF Info • Interconnect guidelines • Q4S

  9. Ongoing Conversations • Session Identifier • SIPSCOTCH charter not advanced, but conversations on the general problem still being discussed

  10. Groups Formed

  11. Message Trends

  12. Documents and Milestones

  13. Meetings

  14. Observations • SIPCLF (Sep09-) • Tooksignificantlylongerthanexpected • Close to pubreq on alldocuments • Martini (Dec09-Mar11) • Heavy use of virtualinterims • Heavy use of trac • Siprec (Mar10-) • Heavy use of virtualinterims

  15. Observations • SIXPAC • Insufficientenergy to completeforminggroup • Atoca (Aug10-) • Extremelylowactivity • Salud (Jul10-) and Cuss (Aug10-) • Lowactivitywarnings at IETF80

  16. Discussion • Whathasworkedwell in the DISPATCH decisionprocess? Wherehasithelped? • Whatisn’thelping as well as wehoped? • Is DISPATCH helping us producebettercharters? • Is DISPATCH making the bestdecisionssothat the actualworkgetsdoneeffectively?