Subject: RE: [Ieprep] Re: draft-ietf-ieprep-requirements-01

From: "Folts, Harold" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:26:22 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Woodcock [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 1:52 PM
> To: RJ Atkinson
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Ieprep] Re: draft-ietf-ieprep-requirements-01
> 
> 
>     > the proposal on the table is for Hal's document to go out as
>     > Informational, not standards-track.  It is important 
> (and the IESG
>     > traditionally will insist) that non-standards-track 
> documents use
>     > language that makes it clear that the document is 
> non-standards-track.
> 
> And not best-practices.
> 
> So it's documenting one user's experience with the PSTN, and 
> the fact that
> that one user would prefer it if the Internet operated more 
> like the PSTN,
> and less like the Internet.

No, this is NOT "one user's" experience with the PSTN at all. The basic user
requirements have been derived with considerable discussion, input and
support internationally from government (of many nations) and non-government
organizations for disaster relief and mittigation to organize and coordinate
recovery operations, save lives, and restore the community infrastructure.
Users range from local search and rescue, fire, police, medical, utility
providers (gas, electric, etc.), construction industry, telecommunication
providers, to local government, and national government officials.

There is some of this capability in the PSTN today in the US as well as
other countries. The objective of this initiative in the IETF is to provide
useful capabilites for disaster relief operations using the Internet and
packet-based technologies provided by public networks for future benefit to
these important activities. Any relationship to existing PSTN is only for
backward compatibility to what might exist. More importantly we are looking
for enhanced capabililities for supporting future disaster relief operations
globally - voice, data, message, video, telemetry, and many more
applications. It is expected that in the future voice will likely become
less used than other communication applications for emergency and disaster
relief support.

Hal

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

---

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:36:11 -0500

On Thursday, Oct 31, 2002, at 14:26 America/Montreal, Folts, Harold 
wrote:
> No, this is NOT "one user's" experience with the PSTN at all.

Until such time as you get other organisations and other countries
to represent themselves here and present their perspectives, preferably
in their own documents about what services they use today and plan
to use in the future, the rest of us (who aren't monetarily or 
contractually
beholden to NCS) can only realistically know that the document 
represents
your views based on your experience at NCS.

The ongoing hand-waving that you speak for the whole world just
is not credible by itself.

Terribly sorry, but that is the reality of the situation.

Ran

---

From: Bill Woodcock <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:19:43 -0800 (PST)

> The objective of this initiative in the IETF is to provide
    > useful capabilites for disaster relief operations using the
    > Internet and packet-based technologies

I'm not seeing any sort of needs-analysis draft in the ieprep-charter
page.  What mechanism did you employ to determine that these useful
capabilities weren't already being provided by the Internet?  The goals
you state, as opposed to the mechanisms, are clearly better met by the
Internet than by the PSTN already.

                                -Bill