[SIPForum-techwg] Meeting Minutes?

[Richard Shockey]

Well ... there were way too many issues to fully place into meeting minutes
etc.

Let me try and summarize what was accomplished.

First we went through a line by line review of the SEP 22 version of the
document addressing all of the relevant comments made. Most of them were
clarifications of the language of the text and their relevance.

On the outstanding issues that kept coming up ( in no particular order) 

1. We agreed that the use of SIP URI's vs TEL is the preferred method of
addressing.

2. There is clearly no consensus on the correct 2119 language MUST implent
vs SHOULD use etc  on the outstanding issues of TLS and TCP. We are going to
have to schedule another conference call to resolve those issues. I'm going
to try and set up a Doodle to check on common availability over the next 2
weeks. 


http://www.doodle.ch/tnmr5r9mv225drfz

3. There was emerging consensus that we do not deep dive into the underlying
issues of NAT Firewall transversal. These are clearly implementation
specific and have multiple issues depending on whether the NAT is within the
SSP network or within the enterprise. John and Alan will review text on
NATs.

4. We do need to have some language here on IPv6 support though how to
incorporate that into the document or place it into an appendix needs to be
resolved. I think Eric will be providing appropriate text :-)

We have sent a note to the IETF AD's on the need to accelerate action on two
ID deemed by the group to simplify several issues 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/draft-ietf-sip-outbound/

https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-cc-transfer/

5. Considerable discussion on REGISTRATION issues etc including a novel use
RFC 3608 described in 7.1.4 and a fuller separation of the REGISTRATION VS
PEERING mode etc.

6. We are going to have to decide once and for all how far we want to go
down the  ECRIT BCP path or stick with what we have.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-05.txt


7. Longer term issue of provisioning the interconnection between IP-PBX and
SP networks. There is a great deal of this going on right now but its SSP
specific and it seems there needs to be some work in this area. Its probably
out of scope for 1.1 but there may need to be some BOF or something like it
in some forum. This needs consultation with the AD's and the general SIP
community on what appropriate next steps should be. It seems that some form
of Requirements Draft for PBX to SSP provisioning needs to be undertaken but
someone needs to step up to the plate and prepare a document for
Minneapolis.

8.	Action Item to integrate/align sections 10,11,12,13. Dave Hancock
and Jamie Palmer of Broadsoft to lead.

9.  No resolution on 7.2.4  Fall over and Recovery and the use of
draft-ietf-sip-connect-reuse

10. Again with REFER etc in section 15.5  Alan, Jamie, John Elwell, David,
and Martin will reconstruct this offline. Jamie will hold the pen on this.

All revisions need to be finished by at least Oct 20. 


If anyone has any other issues now is the time to post them.


>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS [mailto:mdolly at att.com]
>  Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 9:13 AM
>  To: Richard Shockey; techwg at sipforum.org; Eric Burger
>  Subject: Meeting Minutes?
>  
>   Hello,
>  
>  Will there be meeting minutes for the meetings last week?
>  
>  Is there a list of outstanding issues?
>  
>  Thanks,
>  
>  Martin