Subject: Re: [Ieprep] Accounting

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:26:49 EST

In a message dated 12/1/2002 3:38:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

>    And I checked with some ISP folks in Japan. They have no requirement
> for accounting as part of their *deployed* IEprep service.  In fact,
> they claim that their *deployed* IEprep service is identical (*no changes*)
> to their deployed regular commercial IP service.
> 
>     Its fascinating that the several countries with a deployed IEprep 
> service
> "require" so little, but the country with the big paid staff and zero IEprep
> deployment "requires" so much.
> 

[MAP] Perhaps you could elaborate. We've had a lack of info about "deployed 
IEPREP services" in other countries (besides the US), either in the 
circuit-switched world or IP. As far as I know, GETS in the US and MLPP are 
the only ones today in the circuit switched world and there are none in IP. 
The IAA in Japan is something completely different, as is the sevice in UK 
that was described as a way to get priority dial tone.

What specific service in Japan are you referring to? Your statement that 
their "deployed IEPREP service is identical to their deployed regular 
commercial IP service" sounds like it means that they have no actual IEPREP 
service.

Mike Pierce

---

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:37:10 -0500

On Monday, Dec 2, 2002, at 10:26 America/Montreal, [email-masked] 
wrote:
> [MAP] Perhaps you could elaborate. We've had a lack of info about 
> "deployed IEPREP services" in other countries (besides the US), either 
> in the circuit-switched world or IP. As far as I know, GETS in the US 
> and MLPP are the only ones today in the circuit switched world and 
> there are none in IP. The IAA in Japan is something completely 
> different, as is the sevice in UK that was described as a way to get 
> priority dial tone.

IAA is an IEprep service.  IEprep is not scoped to only be voice 
services
such as GETS.  And IEprep is not scoped to inherently require MLPP.

Kindly recall that IETF operates on a global basis.  Just because the
USG thinks it wants MLPP does not mean that it is a global all-countries
requirement from an IETF perspective.  Our standards have to be equally
applicable to all countries (including less connected countries and 
non-western
countries) [1] and must not have nationalised biases.  RFC-1984 is one 
example
of this global perspective on IETF work.

> What specific service in Japan are you referring to? Your statement 
> that their "deployed IEPREP service is identical to their deployed 
> regular commercial IP service" sounds like it means that they have no 
> actual IEPREP service.

No, they reportedly do have an IEprep service to support IAA, but the 
Japanese
reportedly do not believe that MLPP or other QoS mechanisms is a 
requirement for
IEprep.   Instead, they reportedly believe that they need to use 
applications
that are well adapted for the Internet -- rather than trying to make 
the Internet
into a circuit-switched network (as some here seem to be trying to do).

(I'll see if I can't get one of the Japanese folks I talked with to 
describe their
service in their own words on this list, either directly or by 
forwarding a note
from them (with their prior permission before forwarding of course)).

Ran

[1] One of the reasons that IETF still does its main work via email and 
that email list
consensus is the official metric that WG Chairs are supposed to use 
(rather
than using WG meeting in-person consenus) is that we want to permit 
folks in remote
countries without travel budget to be able to participate in IETF 
Working Groups.
This property has been very important in a number of cases (e.g. MIME).

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