RE: Internal WG Review: Recharter of IP Telephony (iptel)

["Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>]

Agreed that a charter probably isn't the right place to explain in detail
the delineation between ENUM, TRIP, SIP server location via DNS, and so on.
Personally, I think the text suggested by Jonathan below is useful, but a
more complete description of the difference between these mechanisms is
warranted. An Informational-track document explaining all of this would be
nice - I worked on something along these lines, though I never completed it
(I needed to add text about TRIP). If we need a WG to take responsibility
for producing such a document, I agree that IPTEL would be a good choice.

- J

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 9:12 AM
> To: Jonathan Rosenberg
> Cc: Harald Tveit Alvestrand; The IETF Secretariat; iesg@ietf.org;
> iab@ietf.org; fluffy@cisco.com
> Subject: Re: Internal WG Review: Recharter of IP Telephony (iptel)
> 
> 
> 
> On fredag, maj 16, 2003, at 17:34 Europe/Stockholm, Jonathan 
> Rosenberg 
> wrote:
> 
> > I think the following text, added to the charter, would 
> address both 
> > issues:
> >
> > TRIP and the gateway registration protocol are orthogonal to the 
> > DNS-based mechanisms specified in ENUM and RFC 3264. Those 
> mechanisms 
> > are used to translate a URI, representing a name, to an address. If 
> > that address is a phone number in the telephone network, trip and 
> > tgrep can be used to assist in determining the right route (through 
> > various gateways) to that number.
> >
> >
> > Is that satisfactory? If so, I will add the text in the appropriate 
> > place.
> 
> Let me put it this way.
> 
> _Somewhere_ in the IETF, we need to discuss how these routing 
> protocols 
> fit together. If IPTEL is the right group, I don't know. That 
> is up to 
> you all which work in this area.
> 
> My point was that the charter possibly should say whether 
> these kind of 
> discussions are in scope or out of scope. If it is in scope, 
> other wg's 
> (ENUM, SIP, SIPPING etc) should be told and redirected to this wg if 
> similar discussions arise.
> 
> ADs are the ones which I think should help the wg chairs find the wg 
> which is best suited to discuss these common issues. Not I.
> 
>     paf
>