IFX Mail Archive: IFX> FW: short notes from IETF FAX WG meet

IFX Mail Archive: IFX> FW: short notes from IETF FAX WG meet

IFX> FW: short notes from IETF FAX WG meeting

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Tue Mar 25 2003 - 12:46:55 EST

  • Next message: Gail Songer: "IFX> IPPFax Cancelled"

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Claudio Allocchio [mailto:Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it]
    Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 9:16 AM
    To: ietf-fax@imc.prg
    Subject: short notes from ietf FAX WG meeting

    Here are a short summary fo the FAX wg meeting in San Francisco.
    Comments, additions etc. are welcome!

    As there were no requested changes to the proposed agenda, we proceeded
    along with it.

    Tamura-san reported that draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-05.txt (the revision
    for Draft Standard of RFC 2305) was approved by IESG and is not in the RFC
    editor's queue. Before publication the document needs also TIFF-FX
    (currently draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-12.txt) to be ready, as there are
    references to the latter.

    Again Tamura-san reported that the two documents regarding gateways,
    draft-ietf-fax-gateway-protocol-08.txt (for Propose Standard) and
    draft-ietf-fax-gateway-options-05.txt (for Informational)
    need some refinement, as requested by the ADs, after the last call was
    finished. The editor is working on it, and will submit an updated versione
    just after the meeting.

    Claudio Allocchio reported that draft-allocchio-gstn-04.txt (for Proposed
    Standard) has been under IESG revision. there was only a change in the
    abstract as a result of the discussion, as the IESG concluded it is
    inappropriate to have normative text (a capital MUST) in an abstract. The
    change will be made directly by the RFC editor during publication. Formal
    approval is expected by the next IESG meeting in two weeks time.

    An updated version of draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-12.txt (for Draft Standard)
    was published, taking into account the comments which came in during the
    discussion. As Rob Buckely could not be present, Claudio presented his
    slides. In particular (see slides) 3 features were removed from the
    specification, as the were lacking support by implementations, while a
    further refinement of the interopoerability report and attached matrix is
    undeway. It is expected that the editors will present the final
    interoperability report within a short time after the meeting. Also new
    IPR statements are being collected, and published on the IETF web site.
    An additional check about raised points in the draft document (see slides)
    implied the addition of RFC3249 as NON normative reference. Also ITU IPR
    statements will be added as a reference. Most of the other points were
    examined but the editors reccommended no changes to the text. Claudio
    asked the WG, and it agreed with the editors reccommendations. The
    question will be taken again on the ML, before the new version is
    published. In this version also an editorial fix in section 7.2.1 will be
    made. Ned added that also RFC3250 and RFC3302 (currently proposed
    standards) will need an editorial update before they are progressed
    together with tiff-fx specification to Draft Standard: in fact they refer
    to image/tiff only insted of distinguishing between image/tiff and
    image/tiff-fx.

    As a note to the AD, Claudio suggested to the ADs some re-ordering of the
    interoperability reports nd IPR statements pages on the WEB site, at least
    indexing th docuements by WG. Ned Freed agreed that there is a need for
    it and will take the point forward.

    A new version of draft-ietf-fax-faxservice-enum-01.txt was ready for the
    meeting. As Toyoda-san could not attend, the slides were presented by
    xxxxxxxxx. The new version conform to the ENUM registration syntax which
    was then approved at the ENUM WG meeting the day after. Claudio asked for
    consensus on the current specification, and the WG supported it.

    Dave Crocker reported the significative changes which were made to SMTP
    Service Extension for Content Negotiation
    (draft-ietf-fax-esmtp-conneg-06.txt) to take into account the many
    comments an objections which came about it. In particular (see slides) the
    intention is to create a machanism which can work also in case
    intermediate MTAs act among them, when ther is not direct end-to-end
    interactions between i-fax devices. The new extension CONPERM is
    introduced: the i-fax machine allows the fist MTA in the chain to perform
    conversion on its behalf, after negotiation (using CONNEG) was done. New
    MIME headers are introduced per message for this purpouse. There was a
    discussion abot the fact that all features specific to internet fax should
    not be rpesent in the specification, and the editor and the WG agreed that
    the specification will be totally indipendent of its internet fax us.
    As most of the discussions came from the wide IETF community, and the
    scope of the specification is not by itself restricted to i-fax, it was
    agreed that the first WG last call will be made on our ML, then the
    discussion will be opened also on the SMTP ML and to the wider IETF lists.

    Again Dave presented the new approach to the timely delivery problem. The
    ld specification was dismissed, as its implementaion would have impacted
    in a to wide way on the existing infrastructure to expect for a resonable
    level of support. Thus (see slides) we now try to obtain performance
    fromthe existing infrastructure, and obtain a timely receipt from the user
    agent involved in the final transaction, using MDN extensions. In order
    for infrastructure to support Timely delivery performance there are
    various possible solutions. Possibly, either e separate TCP port where
    messages have an implied timely delivery request, either upgrading the
    core specifications to make mandatory some current options (Deliverby)
    and/or adding SRV record flags where MTA support "APT" (accontable
    Predictable Timely) mail service. The WG briefly asked for clarification
    on the different options, and the new draft document to be prepared will
    try to clarify the different scenarios of possible implementation.

    At last, FFPIM (draft-ietf-fax-ffpim-01.txt) was not modified since the
    last meeting, as it both depends on CONNEG and Timely delivery, and the
    editor standed it by whioe waiting for these new documents.

    At the end of the meeting, the co-chairs proposed that, unless there are
    major specific technical issues to be solved, this was the last physical
    meeting of the FAX WG. The ML will be used to discuss remaining issues,
    and for last call of pending documents. The co-chairs thanked all the
    participants to the WG meeting, present and past, for their efforts and
    support during these years.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --
    Claudio Allocchio             G   A   R   R
    Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it
                            Project Technical Officer
    tel: +39 040 3758523      Italian Academic and       G=Claudio; S=Allocchio;
    fax: +39 040 3758565        Research Network         P=garr; A=garr; C=it;
    

    PGP Key: http://www.cert.garr.it/PGP/keys.php3#ca



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 25 2003 - 12:47:05 EST