[13:44:03] Karen Seo joins the room [14:03:32] otmar joins the room [14:04:22] Jim McEachern joins the room [14:05:23] mhp joins the room [14:05:57] mhp leaves the room [14:07:59] agallant joins the room [14:09:00] Dan York joins the room [14:09:12] Adam Uzelac joins the room [14:11:28] Adam Uzelac is jabber scribe [14:11:35] xavi.mila joins the room [14:11:37] Thanks [14:11:41] thanks [14:12:00] should there be any issues - ping me via skype (voiploser) should jabber burp [14:12:34] bhoeneis joins the room [14:13:53] nils joins the room [14:13:55] do we have a jabber scribe? [14:13:56] mhp joins the room [14:13:58] pk joins the room [14:14:06] Adam Uzelac is scribe [14:15:40] axelm joins the room [14:16:04] Thanks Adam. Could you ask folks to introduce themselves at the mike each time they speak -- I can't recognize the voices. [14:17:31] aboslutely - and if they don't and I know the speaker - I will cite here [14:18:37] are we on slide 4? [14:19:00] David Schwatz presenting now - he's on the slide titled Registry Data Requirements [14:19:16] thanks [14:19:16] they are unnumbered [14:19:31] xavi.mila leaves the room [14:19:32] got it [14:19:40] next slide - Logical Operations on Registry Data [14:20:01] fyi adam, audio is good. no need to scribe what's being said [14:20:09] (I'm looking at the PDF from the materials page, so I see page numbers in my PDF viewer) [14:20:46] next slide [14:20:51] Other Registry Attributes [14:21:47] next slide - Protocol Requirements [14:22:43] next slide - Next Steps [14:23:27] Jean-Francois Mule at the mic [14:23:41] Hadriel in the queue [14:24:43] Hadriel at the mic now, with JF [14:24:49] Martin Dolly in queue [14:25:17] joseph.johnson.ie joins the room [14:25:42] FYI: full E.164 numbers are just a special case of a prefix [14:26:18] want me to relay? [14:26:21] please [14:26:24] ok [14:27:07] zoil joins the room [14:27:25] frodek joins the room [14:27:48] lj324o230ar joins the room [14:28:20] adam, cancel that. we're too tight in time [14:28:24] ok [14:28:32] too late [14:28:41] I told them that it was a short comment [14:28:54] Jean-Francois presenting now [14:29:24] as usual, the audio is not realtime. about 30 secs today [14:29:34] roger that [14:29:50] Slide 3 [14:30:44] slide 4 [14:31:16] ttfr joins the room [14:32:15] Martin Dolly at the mic - waiting to comment [14:32:28] Sorry, which set of slides are we viewing? Is this the Key Data set? [14:32:54] can somebody scribe what happen for those who are frustrated to be in SIP, missing DRINKS? [14:33:25] karen - we are on Data Model presentation [14:33:46] ttfr - I will try to summarize more than just who's speaking, etc [14:33:47] jean francois mule's [14:33:50] X-BeenThere: 72attendees@ietf.org [14:34:02] Ah, thanks. [14:34:18] http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/08jul/slides/drinks-3.ppt [14:34:56] zoil leaves the room: Computer went to sleep [14:34:58] right now Jean-Francois preseneting the Data Model [14:35:07] he's on slide 5 [14:35:19] David Sshwartz commenting now [14:35:28] thank you [14:35:45] martin dolly commenting now [14:36:01] didn't catch what he said though [14:36:04] slide 6 [14:36:41] there are differences between registry-to-registry vs. registry-to-caches [14:37:01] david schwartz back up in queue to comment [14:37:43] Martin's point seemed to be primarily that a company with a network as large as AT&T's will have lots of connection points [14:38:55] david schwatrz - compares the data exchange here versus DNS cacheing - it's different [14:39:27] Ken Cartwright at the mic [14:39:31] Bob Penfield joins the room [14:40:20] Ken advocates for one data model, versus two - for the Reg2Reg versus Reg2Cache [14:40:46] David at mic - thinks there's a more fundamental difference to have 2 data models [14:40:55] moving on to slide 7 [14:41:13] Protocol Requirements [14:42:06] David at mic - but shot down by WG Chair Shockey [14:42:22] (formerly known as Peppermint Patty) [14:42:52] JF Mule done with the presentation [14:43:04] David at mic [14:43:23] and making the point that a "port-out" is different than a "delete" [14:43:32] but he's going to take the thought to the mailing list [14:43:35] The ignored elephant in the room is: LRF is not a simple provisioning protocol, it needs to be a full blown routing protocol. [14:43:45] Debbie Guyton presenting now [14:43:53] LUF is provisioning, that's coming on fine in these slides. [14:43:55] Key Data for Reg Provisioning Interface [14:44:01] Bob Penfield leaves the room [14:44:04] LRF ist isn't. [14:44:25] (no need to relay. I'm just muttering in my beard) [14:44:26] Bob Penfield joins the room [14:44:31] otmar - is that a general comment - or for Debbie? [14:44:34] ah - ok [14:44:36] general comment [14:45:20] folks - before a comment, it would help to have a (relay please) if you want me to jump up and be your voice [14:46:34] ack [14:46:56] next slide - (page 5) [14:47:21] I'll be more explicit if I need you to act as proxy for me playing Court Jester before Rich's throne. [14:47:47] haha [14:47:48] roger that [14:48:16] Dan York wonders if otmar should really use a bar metaphor with Richard as bartender or something like that :-) [14:49:33] I missed the name there [14:49:35] sorry [14:49:40] JF Mule before that [14:49:49] next slide - (page 6) [14:50:05] David at mic [14:51:16] his point is validation is difficult in the transit provider scenario [14:51:31] (relay if necessary -- I'm not up-to-date on the mailing list exchanges) Selective routing is in conflict with the consolidated reqs document (Section 4, 1st paragraph, "... the registry is expected to return the same responsibility for all parties that query it"). Is this an open issue in the group or is the reqs document just not current? [14:51:58] Karen: as I see it: for the LUF, the same answer should be provided. [14:52:11] For the LRF, the answer can be different [14:52:39] karen - I am going to save your comment for the "general comments" time [14:52:45] OK. Thanks. [14:53:45] I don't want everyone to think that I am cencoring [14:53:53] eburger joins the room [14:54:01] Hadrial presenting [14:54:23] Slides at http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/08jul/slides/drinks-4.ppt [14:54:23] slide 2 - titled 'The Setup' [14:54:25] Are we addressing also the case, if multiple service providers are able to terminate a number? [14:54:45] was there a conclusion on the Guytno draft? [14:55:03] lj324o230ar - no discussion [14:55:12] thanks [14:55:36] if you have a comment, I will share with the WG here, or punt to mailing list [14:56:09] bhoeneis - that case is absolutely being addressed [14:56:24] adam - thanks [14:56:37] np [14:57:01] on the slide now titled - The Problem [14:57:16] next slide - titled - Another Problem [14:58:01] nm joins the room [14:58:10] "SBE" is? [14:58:19] Session Border Element [14:58:21] aka SBC [14:58:29] duh... got it. [14:58:32] thanks [14:58:33] per speermint terminology [14:58:43] it looks better than SBC [14:58:52] next slide - 'A Potential Problem' [14:59:26] I use an email-style URI right now to receive SIP calls [14:59:48] (but I recognize I'm in a minority who are able to do so) [14:59:51] next slide - title "the solution' [14:59:56] Adam, one question you may want to relay from slide 3 - why exactly would Drinks figure this out rather than speermint? [15:00:24] Jim, because speermint painted itself in a corner [15:01:22] hmmmmm - but does this have anything to do with the charter of drinks (is my question) [15:01:24] Otmar -- by the way, thank you for your explanation re: my earlier question. [15:02:02] Karen, I agree with Hadiel's slides [15:02:03] eburger leaves the room [15:02:14] eburger joins the room [15:02:31] jon peterson at the mic [15:04:45] he believes that a dynamic routing protocol for SIP Peermint is beyond the SPIRIT of the charter [15:05:39] Hadriel believes that DRINKS can not address LRF without considering this [15:06:00] for how many years I have been preaching that once you don't have full mesh connectivity and thus need transit, that you necessarily run into a routing problem? [15:06:29] and for many years, you have been right (personal comment) [15:07:45] (Since we are in the DRINKS group, rather than talking about "bite-sized" pieces, shouldn't Hadriel really be talking about taking small "sips"?) [15:07:57] *grin* [15:08:00] whoa [15:08:04] that's a bad one [15:08:40] Blame those who came up with the name. (And I seem to recall Hadriel may have had a role in that.) [15:08:55] yep [15:09:01] he shirley did [15:09:11] It's just that Rich wanted to get rid of "peppermint patty". [15:09:26] but I wasn't here. [15:10:16] nm leaves the room [15:10:28] daryl doesn' t get it. [15:10:37] nils leaves the room [15:10:42] agreed [15:10:51] off the record [15:11:22] ;) [15:11:52] Do we want a single req. document? or one for LUF and one for LRF? [15:12:01] please relay [15:12:03] ok [15:12:10] I was going to ask the same thing [15:12:27] but I don't know if we will get the chance - time is already out [15:12:51] Noone = me, dear shockey [15:13:11] david at the mic [15:13:15] Bob Penfield leaves the room [15:13:24] jf mule at the mic [15:14:27] single document [15:14:32] frodek leaves the room [15:15:49] ok - done [15:16:05] off to the first annual IETF soccer game in front of the hotel [15:16:16] eburger leaves the room [15:16:24] you mean football??? [15:16:52] axelm leaves the room [15:17:01] joseph.johnson.ie leaves the room [15:17:36] sorry [15:17:48] talk to y'all later [15:17:53] Adam Uzelac leaves the room [15:19:44] mhp leaves the room [15:20:07] ttfr leaves the room [15:21:07] agallant leaves the room [15:24:18] Karen Seo leaves the room [15:25:33] Jim McEachern leaves the room [15:33:31] pk leaves the room [15:35:02] otmar leaves the room [15:35:30] bhoeneis leaves the room [15:48:31] lj324o230ar leaves the room: Replaced by new connection [15:48:31] lj324o230ar joins the room [16:02:45] lj324o230ar leaves the room: Replaced by new connection [16:02:46] lj324o230ar joins the room [16:07:07] Dan York leaves the room [16:17:27] eburger joins the room [16:17:35] eburger leaves the room [16:17:40] eburger joins the room [16:17:42] eburger leaves the room [17:24:31] lj324o230ar leaves the room [17:47:10] lj324o230ar joins the room [18:12:33] lj324o230ar leaves the room: Replaced by new connection [18:12:33] lj324o230ar joins the room [20:43:04] lj324o230ar leaves the room: Replaced by new connection [20:43:04] lj324o230ar joins the room