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

From: Volker Hilt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 11:44:21 -0400

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

---

From: "DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 11:50:16 -0400

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.

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

---

From: "NOEL, ERIC C, ATTLABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 11:54:45 -0400

Volker,

Please count me in (standard contributor with cycles to do so).

Thanks,

Eric 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] on behalf of Volker Hilt
Sent: Fri 9/4/2009 11:44 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo
Subject: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT
 
All,

Thanks,

Volker

---

From: "Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 11:08:13 -0500

Part of what we need to discern here is whether folks are willing to
contribute cycles to solving this problem. By that I mean reviewing
documents in detail, serving as document editors, actively driving issue
resolution on the mailing list, updating documents more often than just
prior to the f2f meetings, etc.  

I recognize the significant effort by the overload design team that went
into the overload design  document in the SIPPING WG.  So, we need to
assess that the level of commitment to completing the solution work
remains high.  And, the primary guage for making that assessment is the
level of discussion on the mailing list (both this overload list and the
DISPATCH WG list in terms of agreement on the charter/milestones) -
without that, we cannot get the necessary community support or feedback
for the work. 

Thanks,
Mary. 

-----Original Message-----
From: DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 10:50 AM
To: Volker Hilt; [email-masked]
Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo; Barnes, Mary (RICH2:AR00)
Subject: RE: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

Volker,

Regards,

Martin

-----Original Message-----

All,

Thanks,

Volker

---

From: Daryl Malas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:33:36 -0600

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

> willing and able to actively contribute, we will not move forward with it.

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

---

From: "Moran, Timothy L." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 12:45:01 -0400

Volker,

Very important work for those of us supporting the NCS NS/EP NGN
Priority Services program.  Where do you need help -specifically?  

Br,
Tim M.

-----Original Message-----

All,

Thanks,

Volker

---

From: Charles Shen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 12:48:24 -0400

Volker: absolutely count me in.

Thanks

Charles

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:44 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.
>
> To avoid spamming please remove "[email-masked]" from the To of your
> response.
>

---

From: Volker Hilt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 12:50:41 -0400

Timothy,

Mary had listed a few of the tasks ahead in her mail. Essentially we 
need help with reviewing the current drafts, identifying issues that 
need to be resolved and driving these issues forward on the mailing 
list, editing and updating the drafts, etc.

Thanks,

Volker

---

From: "Abdelal, Ahmed" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 12:50:47 -0400

Hi Volker,

Please count me in for this effort.

Thanks,
Ahmed 

-----Original Message-----

All,

Thanks,

Volker

---

From: Victor Pascual Avila <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 19:18:21 +0200

+1

-- 
Victor Pascual Ávila

---

From: Janet P Gunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 14:30:48 -0400

Mary,

This is VERY important to us.

I will make sure we have the cycles for review, edit, update, and 
resolving issues.

Janet

This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in 
delivery. 
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to 
any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement 
or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such 
purpose.

"Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]> 
Sent by: [email-masked]
09/04/2009 12:08 PM

To
"DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS" <[email-masked]>, "Volker Hilt" 
<[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
cc
Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Subject
Re: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

Thanks,
Mary. 

-----Original Message-----
From: DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 10:50 AM
To: Volker Hilt; [email-masked]
Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo; Barnes, Mary (RICH2:AR00)
Subject: RE: [sip-overload] Interest in a SIP Overload WG - URGENT

Volker,

Regards,

Martin

-----Original Message-----

All,

Thanks,

Volker

---

From: Salvatore Loreto <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:33:08 +0300

I am interested to help and contribute

Sal

Volker Hilt wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>> 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