short notes from ietf FAX WG meeting
Claudio Allocchio <[email protected]> Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:16:00 +0100 (CET)
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.fax |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <Pine.OSX.4.53.0303241614480.430@mac-allocchio3.elettra.trieste.it> |
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 [email protected] 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