Subject: [stir] Feedback on LS1354

From: 晨张 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:49:41 +0800

Dear All:

How do you do!

I am Chen Zhang, as one editor of X.ticvs.

Informed by my colleague Deng, I noticed the email list which got LS/i/o of
X.ticvs discussed.

Here are some explainations for your consideration:

1. X.ticvs focused on some concrete technologies to counter the voice spam
in traditional telecommunication network, that is circuit-switched, which
is so different from the internet. And as IETF is good at Internet, we
didn't refer any work of IETF. Sorry for that.

2. Many of these tecnologies recommended in X.ticvs won't fit to interent,
and only fit to the circuit-switched network. The circuit-switched network
is an old type and many advanced technologies won't fit to it but active to
Internet. These technologyies may follow the similar methodology in RFC
5039 and etc but many of them are just only for the circuit-switched
network. Different infratstructure generates different countering
technologies.

3. It is believed that there is no copy of the specifications or the
recommendations of other SDOs.

4. The management of telecommunication networks follows the system of TMF,
whose methodology is different of that of internet. Singnaling data (here
instead of transactional data) is not collected specially for countering
voice spam. In fact, technologies of countering voice spam just reuse the
data aggreated by signaling management system. Because of the limitation of
the architecture of the traditional networks, signaling management system
is necessary for most telecommunication operators to keep high-level
service qualities and diagnose service failures.

5. Today traditional telecommunication networks still carry huge voice
services, among which voice spam does exist world-wide. It is hopeful that
we can do some goodness at countering voice spam in circuit-switched area
by X.ticvs. X.ticvs was contributed by China, Korea, Japan, Canada and
America with contributions and living discussions in recent years.

Thank you for your consideration!

Best Regards!

Chen Zhang

China Mobile Group Design Institute

+86 0 13810642906

[email-masked]
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[email-masked]');>

---

From: Tony Rutkowski <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 07:54:01 -0400

Dear Chen,

It is good that you are engaging STIR.  However, as someone
who has been involved in dealing with this work item on the
ITU-T side, it seems something has become lost in translation.

The X.ticvs work item was initiated in 2011 by China Mobile,
with editors designated from China Mobile, and over the
past four years pursued by submitted contributions only
from China Mobile.  During the course of the time, other
participants at the ITU-T meetings have questioned why
the work has not been pursued in the bodies where industry
operators and vendors attempt to deal with voice SPAM,
and where useful techniques, guides and arrangements
have been developed.

These bodies include especially the GSMA Fraud and Security
Group, 3GPPSA3, MAAWG, and STIR, among others.  SG17 where
China Mobile has been pursuing this work is an intergovernmental
body and there is almost no industry participation or expertise
in this area.  Somehow, you seem to have interpreted this as a
problem of "copying other SDO specifications."

The current version of X.ticvs is attached - which China Mobile
is asking the world's governments to approve in two weeks,
as the definitive standard for " Technologies involved in countering
voice spam in telecommunication organizations."  It has a key
figure at the outset that includes "Internet, Mobile Telecommunication
Network, and PSTN."  There is reference to only two old ITU-T
Recommendations X.1240 and X.1244 in addition to the few
generic admonitions contained in the document.  The draft is
completely devoid of the considerable array of current industry
methodologies and approaches such as the STIR deliverables. As
such, the draft serves essentially no purpose.

The admonition here is for the China Mobile authors developing
this material in SG17 to engage in existing industry work dealing
with voice spam, and if they still find it necessary to produce an
intergovernmental body Recommendation on the subject, to
reflect the broad array of platforms developed by industry.  In
other words, you are being encouraged to copy!

--tony

On 2015-03-31 1:49 AM, 晨张 wrote:
> 4. The management of telecommunication networks follows the system of 
> TMF, whose methodology is different of that of internet. Singnaling 
> data (here instead of transactional data) is not collected specially 
> for countering voice spam. In fact, technologies of countering voice 
> spam just reuse the data aggreated by signaling management system. 
> Because of the limitation of the architecture of the traditional 
> networks, signaling management system is necessary for most 
> telecommunication operators to keep high-level service qualities and 
> diagnose service failures.
>
> services, among which voice spam does exist world-wide. It is hopeful 
> that we can do some goodness at countering voice spam in 
> circuit-switched area by X.ticvs. X.ticvs was contributed by China, 
> Korea, Japan, Canada and America with contributions and living 
> discussions in recent years.
>
>