Subject: [MEDIACTRL] Updates to Charter

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2006 14:27:20 -0800

I have been having a few follow up conversations with people and  
there are a few changes I would like to make to the charter if they  
are acceptable to the folks on this list. Most of them come out of  
the BOF.

1) Propose some milestones and dates

2) Mention we will work with AVT and MMUSIC for appropriate topics

3) Discovery of media servers is out of scope

I would also like to get a draft charter ready to go to IESG really  
soon now so I hope we can come to consensus on finalizing the draft  
charter. My goal is to have an MEDIACTRL WG approved before the next  
IETF.

Cullen

_______________________________________________
MEDIACTRL mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl

---

From: "Even, Roni" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:14:05 +0200

Cullen,
I am not clear what "Discovery of media servers is out of scope" means.

If it just means finding the location of the media server I am OK. 
If it also means discovery of the media server capabilities which means
which services it can offer from the set of media server services
defined, I would suggest that it will be in scope.

The major assumption is that media server and application servers can
come from different vendors otherwise there is no need to the protocol. 
Media servers can have different functionality - not all media servers
will support IVR, Announcements, conferencing.
The Application server will need to know what functions each media
server supports in order to use them. 

Roni Even

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 12:27 AM
> To: Media Control
> Subject: [MEDIACTRL] Updates to Charter
> 
> 
************************************************************************
**
> **********
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
> viruses.
************************************************************************
**
> **********

---

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 04:58:43 -0800

Sorry - I should have been clearer  but what you are saying makes  
sense to me

> If it just means finding the location of the media server I am OK.
I think we are on same page here. I'm assuming that the application  
server will have some configured list of media servers or discover  
thought some means out of scope for this WG the list of possible  
media servers that it might use. I just did not want to get into some  
like SRVLOC or TRIP to find out about servers.

> defined, I would suggest that it will be in scope.
Yes - agree

---

From: "Dolly, Martin C, ALABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:04:08 -0600

I  believe that discovery of MS capabilities is out of scope. From a
service provider perspective, we know the capabilities of the equipment
we deploy.

Cheers, Martin

---

From: "Even, Roni" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 18:09:35 +0200

Martin,
Of course you know what you deploy, but how do you configure your
application servers to know which MS or Media servers to use for IVR,
which one for announcement, for audio conferencing for video
conferencing.
Do you require the Application server to have a UI for configuring it.
Roni Even 

> From: Dolly, Martin C, ALABS [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 6:04 PM
> To: Cullen Jennings; Even, Roni
> Cc: Media Control
> Subject: RE: [MEDIACTRL] Updates to Charter
> 
computer

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:09:53 -0500

Roni, Cullen,

Generalizing a little on Martin's point of view below (with which I
obviously agree),

Since this new WG has the focus of AS-MS *control*, I believe that the
point of departure for this new WG is that the AS already knows
(directly or indirectly) that the MS it is using has sufficient
capabilities for what the AS wants to do.  

While I agree that it may be a useful tool for the AS to discover MS
capabilities, it is not an absolutely necessary capability and I think
would dilute the focus of the WG.
(It may not be the AS that has to discover the MS capabilities, it may
be some other 'box' on behalf of the set of ASes that does that. That
knowledge of capabilities of each MS could also come through some of
kind of provisioning approach in some implementations.  ... So this is
overall a big topic.)

I would also add, regarding one of Roni's points below, that even if the
AS and MS equipment were all from the same vendor, the various
particular MSes deployed may vary in configuration.  So, same vendor or
different vendors, the need is there to address AS-MS control protocol.

cheers,

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: Dolly, Martin C, ALABS [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 11:04 AM
To: Cullen Jennings; Roni Even
Cc: Media Control
Subject: RE: [MEDIACTRL] Updates to Charter

Cheers, Martin

---

From: "Dolly, Martin C, ALABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:11:28 -0600

That is the task of the Media Resource Broker 

-----Original Message-----
From: Even, Roni [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 11:10 AM
To: Dolly, Martin C, ALABS; Cullen Jennings
Cc: Media Control
Subject: RE: [MEDIACTRL] Updates to Charter

Martin,

computer

---

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 17:28:51 -0500

I would offer the Media Broker is an embodiment of a thing that understands
a protocol for locating the "correct" media server.

I would offer that for us to work on something that is more than just a
"protocol that runs on IP," i.e., an Internet protocol, we MUST deliver a
method for locating servers and discovering their capabilities.

I would also offer that there is a 3% chance we will be creating a new
protocol for such a task.  In particular, if one recalls the proposed
deliverables and milestones discussed in San Diego, this is Deliverable #4,
with a milestone of delivering a Broker Protocol *or* BCP in June of 2008.
That is, there is a 97% chance that the broker protocol is simply a
convention for how media servers advertise their capabilities, using
existing protocols.

Thus, as a participant, my vote is to keep this work in charter.

Of course, I will always bow low to my AD :-)