Subject: Re: [sacm] use case document

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 14:05:27 -0400

Thanks, Tony, that would be helpful.

Text describing some specific use cases already used in the field (using proprietary technology) would be especially helpful for the use cases document.

David Harrington

 <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]

+1-603-828-1401

From: Tony Rutkowski [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 1:05 PM
To: David Harrington
Subject: RE: [sacm] use case document

Hi David,

I'll see what I can do to bridge the stovepipes here. 

ETSI and the CCRA may also be starting efforts that are SACM-like.

Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: David Harrington <[email-masked]> 
Date: 05/06/2013 17:25 (GMT+01:00) 
To: [email-masked],'ietfdbh' <[email-masked]> 
Cc: "'Waltermire, David A.'" <[email-masked]>,[email-masked] 
Subject: RE: [sacm] use case document 

Hi Tony,

Steve took your suggestion and looked at the SECAM work, and by his
analysis, the SECAM work is focused differently than the sacm work somewhat.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sacm/current/msg00920.html

The IETF is driven by efforts of individual volunteers; there are no
membership requirements; just join in the discussion. And it's free.
Individuals from the 3GPP SECAM and ETSI ISI efforts are welcome to come be
a part of the IETF work being done in sacm.
I looked at the possibility of participating in the SECAM and ISI work to
"actively engage" as an individual across SDOs (not that I actually want to
take on that extra work).
3GPP requires a corporate membership in order to contribute. I might be able
to get a guest membership, but that would only allow me access to the
documents, not any rights to contribute or vote, and a guest membership is
only good for six months (which is less time than this WG is expected to
last).
ETSI requires contributors to be a member of an Organizational Partner, and
has a membership fee schedule that is well outside my range as an individual
contributor.
So the active engagement would appear to be one-way (from SECAM and ISI to
sacm) if I were to do it. And I don't want to commit my time to doing all
three efforts.

If you, as an IETF individual contributor, believe that there is something
in the SECAM work that should be considered in our use cases, then by all
means please do the analysis and send some text to the WG asking that your
text be incorporated into the use case document.
Ditto for the ETSI ISI work.
(being careful of copyrighted material, of course)
If you know of others participating in SECAM and/or ISI who want to
contribute to the IETF sacm work as individual contributors, please let them
know they are welcome to contribute here. For free, with no membership
requirements.
And we certainly welcome your taking the work being done here (which is
freely available anyway) and making the SECAM and ISI efforts aware of it.
While the sacm work isn't cast in stone yet, you, as a contributor to SECAM
and ISI, could also pass on some of the sacm work to those efforts to
provide some active engagement between the efforts. 

Let me stress, however, that the" active engagement" would be you acting as
an individual contributor to multiple efforts. The SECAM and ISI work will
typically be given no greater weight than any other individual contribution,
per IETF rules.

David Harrington
[email-masked]
+1-603-828-1401

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Tony
Rutkowski
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 2:03 AM
To: ietfdbh
Cc: 'David Harrington'; 'Waltermire, David A.'; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [sacm] use case document

You can get many at least one set of use cases from the SECAM working group
in 3GPP SA3 - which is very active doing much the same things as are
occurring in SACM.
Ditto for the ISI group in ETSI.

SACM can improve its effectiveness by
proactively engaging the multiple other
similar groups out there.
--tony

On 2013-06-04 2:01 AM, ietfdbh wrote:
> I have no objection to helping edit the draft.
> However, the main failing of the draft in my eyes is that it doesn't 
> really contain use cases.
> I am not active in the industry we are targeting, so we would need 
> some input on use cases from operators, security admins, vendors, etc. who
are.
> David Harrington
> [email-masked]
> +1-603-828-1401

_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm