Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: Status of draft-ietf-sipping-toip-04.txt

From: "Roy, Radhika R." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:47:55 -0500

Guido:

What are your problems if the draft deals with the requirements of these
items (a. p2p, b. mpt, c. toip only media, d. multiple media along with
toip, d. ip only, e. ip + LANs, f. ip + pstn, g. ip + pstn + cellular, f.
mobility [user + terminal]) being completed as I explained as the draft
itself has set the stage?

Does this not mean that the implementers will be better off to implement the
ToIP over those networking environments as the draft has set the stage for
all those environments? 

Just by saying out-of-scope will not help.

Why do you think that the present draft is OK as it stands now although all
of us agreed that this is an INCOMPLETE draft sent to the IETF list showing
work-in-progress? You are taking our time unnecessarily discussing this as
you not did raise objections to all of us before.

Inline [RRR]

Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]
<mailto:[email-masked]> ] On Behalf Of Guido Gybels
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 10:44 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: Status of draft-ietf-sipping-toip-04.txt

Radhika,

<<Gudio:>>

It's Guido.

<<You have no right to ask whether I have the "authority" or not. Period.>>

Of course I have. It's a free country. I have the right of speech and the
right to ask whatever I want. I might of course be wrong in some of my
opinions, but I have as much *right* to speak as anyone else (and so have
you).

[RRR] Like everyone, you have the right to do anything (even a child can do
childish things in the free country!), but you know by this time that you
are deadly wrong to raise this question. 

<<You are welcome to supply comments and send reply on comments on the draft
as much you can. That's all you can do.>>

Indeed and as I have already done that, I suggest those replies can be the
basis of discussion. I don't want to waste other people's time on yes/no
games, I suggest it's best to now seek other WG members' advise.

[RRR] IETF mailing lists are OPEN to all, and no body is forcing anyone to
take his/her time to respond. So, why are you not taking off if you feel you
are taking my time to respond to you mails?

[RRR] As you have wisely pointed out let other people (Gunnar, Arnoud)
should take the issue for discussions, let it be. What are you spending in
replying the mails of mine? You could it before!

<<Let us continue to do as much as you like.>>

Thank you!

<<By the way, you did not reply any technical comments before while raised
to all including yourself. Now you have come to the IETF list!>>

I have been on this list since 2001 and have contributed to the debate, both
online and in IETF meetings where I felt I could provide a helpful
contribution. I will continue to do so.

[RRR] You are seem to be NEW kid in the block just from the year 2001!

The crux of the matter seems to be whether or not this draft is incomplete
or contradicts itself. My position is that it is neither incomplete nor
contradictory. I would find it helpful if you could quote the draft as proof
of where it is either of those and we could take it from there.

[RRR] Why are you afraid to provide the technical solutions? I have NOT seen
this problem with anyone else.

[RRR] What are your problems if the draft deals with the requirements of a.
p2p, b. mpt, c. toip only media, d. multiple media along with toip, d. ip
only, e. ip + LANs, f. ip + pstn, g. ip + pstn + cellular, f. mobility (user
+ terminal)?

[RRR] What are you so much shy to discuss technical solutions for the ToIP
in those networking environments that the draft has already set the stage?
What does it cost you?

I can't parse most of your other comments and they seem to just reiterate
what has been said before, so I'll leave it at that.

[RRR] Probably you NEVER will! May be it is a good time to take rest!

Guido

Guido

Guido Gybels

Director of New Technologies

RNID, 19-23 Featherstone Street

London EC1Y 8SL, UK

Tel +44(0)207 294 3713

Fax +44(0)207 296 8069 

Want to Hear More?

If you're not hearing as well as you used to, or feel someone near you may
be missing out, call 0845 600 55 55 now and take our five-minute telephone
hearing check.

For more information visit www.breakingthesoundbarrier.org.uk

*******************************************************************

This email and attachments (if any) must be swept for viruses before
opening. Their contents may be confidential or privileged and are intended
solely for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient and
you have received this email in error you must not read or use this email
and should notify RNID on: +44 (0) 20 7296 8282.

RNID, Registered Office 19-23 Featherstone Street, London EC1Y 8SL No.
454169 (England, Registered Charity No. 207720)

********************************************************************

_______________________________________________

Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
<https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping> 

This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP

Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip

Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: "Arnoud van Wijk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 18:54:05 +0100

I aplogize for this "Barfight".

And for scaring bartender Dean. :-)

This draft will show ToIP:

1.	It is just as normal and easy to implement as VoIP and Video-overIP.
That Text-over-IP is nothing exotic. If fact, when a network is fully SIP
and RTP compatible, ToIP must just be possible as VoIP is. Just know that
VoIP is not the only thing here. That is one thing.
2.	Because ToIP is also an excellent medium for people to use it as
REPLACEMENT of voice, we added requirements to ensure that ToIP will stay
that way.
3.	ToIP is for a number of people a bit strange, we are all used to
text as email or Instant Messaging and even the stuff you see printed on
your newspaper. The idea of having text streaming in real-time scares a
number of people. But it is not so scary at all. It is the lightest media of
the trio Voice, video and real-time text. But due the streaming and
real-time text..it behaves differently from what you are used to with
IM/Email/IRC/etc.
4.	Attention goes to transcoding of ToIP when interworking with other
networks that do not use SIP/RTP. For the PSTN, we explain in detail since
we want to ensure that the hearing and speech impaired are conected to ToIP.
Even that ToIP mainstream is and suitable for everybody when voice is not so
appropriate to use. Going into depth describing call flows etc is out of
scope for this draft. Just that if SIP/RTP stops, it does not mean there is
no more real-time text on the different network.

In separate future followup drafts we will go into details transcoding and
ToIP with usecases, call flows and deeper details.

Where we will highlight PSTN -IP

And Conferencing with ToIP

And Transcoding/ text relay gateways. Including how such text gateways
interconnect and use ToIP to ensure full interworking between the different
networks.

Emergency calls etc

It is possible that some of those future followup drafts will be in a
different working group the the SIPPING WG. But this draft is the the steady
link to refer to/from

I have been communicating with Radhika, and he disagrees with this version.
I did look at his arguments and points. Some of his feedback has been used
to clarify the draft. Which is great.

We did not plan a big overhaul, since WGLC is already over. And the feedback
from you as WG has been implemented. 

His other points will be covered in future drafts. And I encourage Radhika
to write down his points, and we will then place them in the suitable future
draft. Or he can start on a draft himself. 

Rome is not build in 1 day, and even I would love to build Rome in 1 day,
but sometimes it is better to begin with the Senate building and then build
the connecting districts. If you just have Rome fully in 1 day, Rome would
still not be build!

We have seen at least that there is a lot of passion in Real-time text/ToIP.
:-)

Greetz

Arnoud van Wijk

  _____  

From: Roy, Radhika R. [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: vrijdag 10 maart 2006 17:48
To: Guido Gybels; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: Status of draft-ietf-sipping-toip-04.txt

Guido:

Inline [RRR]

Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Guido Gybels
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 10:44 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: Status of draft-ietf-sipping-toip-04.txt

Radhika,

<<Gudio:>>

It's Guido.

Thank you!

Guido

Guido

Guido Gybels

London EC1Y 8SL, UK

Tel +44(0)207 294 3713

Fax +44(0)207 296 8069 

Want to Hear More?