Re: Re-charter?

I have a generic, high level comment.

If we are extending the charter from “requirements only” to “requirements
and solutions where not covered elsewhere”,  I think the solution space
should include solutions for “the evolution of GETS/WPS to IP” as well as
solutions for “the evolution of MLPP to IP”.

Similarly, the requirements and frameworks that have been previously
produced cover the entire IEPREP scope, both "sort of like MLPP" and "sort
of like GETS".  So I think it would be appropriate to have deliverables
such as
 "Emergency Threats Analysis for Commercial/Public Networks"
 "Requirements for Emergency Preparedness in Commercial/Public Networks"
"Potential Solutions for Commercial/Public Networks"
"Mechanisms to be Used by Commercial/Public Networks"
as well as the ones proposed for "Government/Military Networks".

I think that would be more useful than "Differences between GETS and MLPP
networks", especially since some of the differences which are significant
in the circuit switched world may be less significant in the packet
switched world.  But maybe if I saw an abstract of what was intended for
the document, I would change my mind.

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




                                                                                                                            
                      "King, Kimberly                                                                                       
                      S."                      To:      "Ieprep ([email protected])" <[email protected]>                        
                      <KIMBERLY.S.KING         cc:      [email protected], "Jon Peterson \([email protected]\)"        
                      @saic.com>               <[email protected]>                                                   
                      Sent by:                 Subject: [Ieprep] Re-charter?                                                
                      ieprep-bounces                                                                                        
                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                            
                      06/30/2005 10:24                                                                                      
                      AM                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                            





Scott and I have asked for a 1 hour meeting slot at
the Paris IETF meeting to discuss a possible re-charter
of ieprep.  A provisional new charter is included below.

Kimberly


*****************************************
Draft revision
Internet Emergency Preparedness (ieprep) Charter

Description of Working Group:

Effective telecommunications capabilities are imperative to
facilitate immediate recovery operations for serious
disaster events including natural disasters (e.g.,
hurricanes, floods, earthquakes) and those created by man
(e.g., terrorist attacks, combat situations or wartime
events).  In addition, related capabilities should be usable
in normal command and control operations of military
services, which often have timeliness requirements even in
peacetime.  The IEPREP WG will address proactive and
reactive robustness and recovery from various outages using
three perspectives:

1. A commercial (i.e., or public) telecommunications
infrastructure

2. A governmental/military telecommunications infrastructure
that may retains sole ownership and administration of its
own resources

3. A governmental/military telecommunications infrastructure
that combines private resources and leverages public
infrastructure.  This scenario may be subject to local
policies, laws, and regulations.

Disasters can happen any time, any place, unexpectedly.
Quick response for recovery operations requires immediate
access to any public telecommunications capabilities at
hand. These capabilities include: conventional telephone,
cellular phones, and Internet access via online terminals,
IP telephones, and wireless PDAs. The commercial
telecommunications infrastructure is rapidly evolving to
Internet-based technology.  Therefore, the Internet
community needs to consider how it can best support
emergency management and recovery operations.

Potential disasters for governmental/military
infrastructures can extend beyond what might be experienced
by the commercial/public sector and can be anticipated to
some degree.  Thus, proactive mechanisms to address would-be
outages are required for these scenarios.

The IEPREP WG will work on these three perspectives
(commercial, governmental/military, and the combination) and
synergize common mechanisms and requirements into other
groups where possible, while maintaining a separate track of
IEPREP documents for the unique mechanisms and requirements
of each perspectives.

Now that the initial documents describe the broad problem
space and its salient characteristics, new efforts will
focus on specific requirements and solutions such as those
pertaining to the governmental/military sector.  One
document exists in the Transport Area working group of
interest to IEPREP that could satisfy a governmental
framework/BCP is draft-ietf-tsvwg-mlpp-that-works-XX.  This
document will progress to completion in that WG, yet be the
basis of more work in this IEPREP WG.  Some additional
efforts on the governmental/military track within IEPREP
will focus on this TSVWG document, analyze gaps, and provide
input where needed.

The following are four specific examples that can satisfy
the interests of governmental/military (and potentially,
commercial/public) emergency communications:

1. Conveying information about the priority of specific
flows (or sessions) that originate in a VoIP environment.
This could include a requirements effort to describe
extensions to NSIS or RSVP. Requirements for NSIS would be
forwarded to the NSIS working group. Requirements for RSVP
could be forwarded to tsvwg or worked on in IEPREP.

2. Nested VPNs require special considerations for routing
and QoS if nodes in the path that make these decisions
generally have limited information.

3. Some countries require civil networks to preempt sessions
under state circumstances, and preemption is considered an
absolute requirement in governmental networks in most
countries. Unless implementation of these requirements can
be objectively shown to threaten network health (via
simulation or in operations), then the requirement needs to
be considered by IEPREP and specific solutions must be
developed.

4. Non-real-time applications require measures of QoS and
other preferential treatments, as voice will not be the only
application used by IEPREP.

In the IETF, considerations for treatment and security of
emergency communications stretch across a number of Areas
and Working Groups, notably including the various telephony
signaling working groups, Protocol for carrying
Authentication for Network Access (pana), the open Transport
Area for path-coupled signaling and various operational
groups. IEPREP will cooperate closely with these groups and
with those outside of the IETF such as various ITU-T study
groups.


If there is an existing WG that can discuss the requirements
for extending their protocol or mechanism, IEPREP will
generate only a requirements document for that group to
discuss.

If there is not an existing WG that can discuss the
requirements for extending their protocol or mechanism,
IEPREP will prepare requirements and discuss the extension
of that protocol/mechanism or protocols/mechanisms within
IEPREP.


Goals and Milestones:

Done   Submit initial I-D of Requirements

Done   Submit initial I-D of Framework

Done   Submit initial I-D of Recommendations BCP

Done   Submit Requirements I-D to IESG for publication as an
       Informational RFC

Done   Submit Framework I-D to IESG for publication as an
Informational RFC

Dec 03 Submit Recommendations I-D to IESG for publication as
a BCP

Oct 05 Submit an initial I-D of Emergency Threats Analysis
of Government/Military Networks

Dec 05 Submit an initial I-D of Differences between GETS and
MLPP Networks

Feb 06 Submit an initial I-D of Requirements of
Government/Military Networks

Mar 06 Submit an initial I-D of Considerations for potential
solutions of Government/Military Networks

Apr 06 Submit an initial I-D of Mechanisms to be used by
       Government/Military Networks

Oct 05 Submit final I-D of Emergency Threats Analysis of
       Government/Military Networks to IESG as Informational
RFC

Feb 06 Submit final I-D of Requirements of
Government/Military Networks to IESG as Informational RFC

Apr 06 Submit final I-D of Mechanisms to be used by
       Government/Military Networks to IESG as BCP RFC

The working group will discuss re-chartering if additional
efforts are agreed upon by the WG (for example, work items
related to protocols outside existing WGs).

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep