Subject: Re: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

From: "DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 15:42:43 -0400

In 2 and raise you 2 on that rant. Thumbs up

----- Original Message -----
From: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
To: Volker Hilt <[email-masked]>; [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Sent: Fri Sep 04 12:33:36 2009
Subject: [sip-overload]  Re: Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

All,

The problem is not interest in this issue.  The problem is the interest was
there 3 years ago when this problem was introduced.  The other issue is
related working groups tend to be more interested in developing more
features rather than dealing with the operational issues that exist for
service providers.  Since, this is the case, service providers simply ask
their proxy, session border controller, and media gateway vendors to solve
it in an adhoc, proprietary manner in the interim.  Once we finally get
through 2 years of design work and many theoretical discussions the service
provider community thumbs their proverbial nose at the IETF and says we have
it taken care of...thanks, but no thanks (don't believe me...see ICE, NAT,
LNP, History-Info....).  Also, the vendor community says we don't care,
because they've already implemented their proprietary solutions, meeting the
needs of their customers.  Why would they want to invest more time on a
problem they've already "solved"?

With these things in mind, I think the design group did a great job, more
than thorough.  The work they have done should not be left on the shelf to
gain dust for years to come.  Instead, I think a solution should be driven
forward for the community to consider when they realize their proprietary
solutions don't scale for some unknown reason...it will happen.

I desperately wish I had the cycles to invest the time commitment to this
work, but I am knee deep in tasks on the "home front".  My comments are to
encourage the work to continue and discourage throwing it away due to
silence on the mailing list.  The alternative is to "shelf" the work and
address it again when those "scaling" issues come back...maybe they
won't...we can only speculate.

My two cents...

--Daryl

On 9/4/09 9:44 AM, "Volker Hilt" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> All,
> 
> the DISPATCH WG is trying to gauge the interest in moving forward with
> the SIP Overload Control work as we had no discussion on the dispatch list.
> 
> So please respond to this email if your are
> - interested in actively contributing to a standard AND
> - have the cycles needed to do so
> 
> To avoid spamming please remove "[email-masked]" from the To of
> your response.
> 
> If the interest in this work has ceased and there are not enough people
> willing and able to actively contribute, we will not move forward with it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Volker
> _______________________________________________
> sip-overload mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-overload

-----------------
Daryl Malas
CableLabs
(o) +1 303 661 3302
(f) +1 303 661 9199
mailto:[email-masked]

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

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:12:36 +0200

Hi,

I'm interested in actively contributing to this work providing that the solution enables negotiation of the format to be used to convey overload control information and therefore does not mandate a specific format.

Best regards,

Youssef

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] De la part de DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS Envoyé : vendredi 4 septembre 2009 17:50 À : Volker Hilt; [email-masked] Cc : Gonzalo Camarillo Objet : Re: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

Volker,

This is very important work. The design team are experts from the SP and vendor communities. Lack of "list" discussion should is not metric here, and/or other topics.

Regards,

Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Volker Hilt
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 11:44 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo
Subject: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

All,

the DISPATCH WG is trying to gauge the interest in moving forward with the SIP Overload Control work as we had no discussion on the dispatch list.

To avoid spamming please remove "[email-masked]" from the To of your response.

If the interest in this work has ceased and there are not enough people willing and able to actively contribute, we will not move forward with it.

Thanks,

Volker