Presence and IntComm WG

["Ben Chinowsky" <>]

Hi all,

Please review the priorities I've listed for the features proposed for Austin,
and send me any corrections.

Talk to you tomorrow,
Ben C.


*Action Items as of June 9*

[AI] Joe will maintain a list of Austin demo ideas on the PIC web site.
[AI] If he has time, Joe will analyze the statistics on portal traffic.
[AI] On the June 10 PIC call, the group will discuss putting together a report
on experiences with the PIC trials so far.
[AI] Larry will arrange a conference with the Cisco location-technologies
expert, bearing in mind that the PIC working group can't do NDA.
[AI] Ben T. will seek support for SIP.edu click-to-dial directories at the
June 16 SIP.edu workshop.
[AI] Joe will send out a note asking people to join teams to work on the 
various
features proposed for Austin.
[AI] Ben T. will arrange regular contacts with vendors interested in
participating in the demo (new Internet2 member Avaya in particular).
[AI] All will send Ben T. any information they have on vendors interested in
participating in the demo.
[AI] Jeremy will formally register the PIC demo with the Austin meeting
planners, noting its special character as one of an ongoing series, and as
something that's woven into the meeting as whole.
[AI] Ben T. will get contacts for the buildout for Austin, and in particular
find out when information on the physical layout of the meeting will be
available.
[AI] Jeremy will send the people on this call an Internet2 draft document on
next steps for presence; all will send comments to him (NOT to the author of 
the
document).
[AI] Joe will send Ben T. specifics on the problem he's having with mail 
missing
from the archive; Ben T. will take this up with the mail admin.

*Attendees*

Jeremy George (chair) - Yale
Joe Rork - Ford
Ben Teitelbaum - Internet2
Jamey Hicks - HP
Xiaotao Wu - Columbia
Jiri Kuthan - iptel.org
Ben Chinowsky (scribe) - Internet2

*Discussion*

The group reviewed action items from the May 5 minutes:

[AI] All will send suggestions for the Austin demo to the list.
- Done.

[AI] Ben T. will aggregate the Austin suggestions for discussion on the May 6
call; this will be the main agenda item for that call.
- Done for today -- see discussion below.

[AI] Joe will maintain a list of Austin demo ideas on the PIC web site.
- Still to do. Joe needs to get web access.

[AI] Joe will analyze the statistics on portal traffic.
- Low priority; Joe will do this if he has time.

[AI] All will send Ben T. suggestions for a name for the demo-specific mailing
list, and Ben will set up the list.
- Done; the list is 
.
 Jeremy stressed that all development
discussion should move to this list.

[AI] On the May 13 PIC call, the group will discuss putting together a report 
on
experiences with the PIC trials so far.
- To do on the June 10 call.

[AI] Ben T. will see if Internet2 Health Sciences Program Manager Mary Kratz 
can
join the May 13 PIC call for a discussion of possibilities in this area.
- Ben has talked to Mary; Health Sciences' participation in PIC will be taken
up in a separate group.

[AI] Larry will arrange a conference with the Cisco location-technologies
expert, bearing in mind that the PIC working group can't do NDA.
- Still in the works.

[AI] Jamey will follow up with his contact at Microsoft.
- Done. Microsoft is moving in a different direction, away from exposing SIP
interfaces, so it looks like they will not be participating for the 
foreseeable
future. Jamey noted that he's obtained a patch (not from Microsoft) that 
should
enable the current version of Windows Messenger to work with the PIC demo.


The group reviewed and prioritized feature requests for the next PIC demo. The
person[s] proposing each feature are listed in brackets. Priorities are based 
on
a combination of 1) how much we'd like to see the feature and 2) how hard it
looks to implement. The priority assigned to the feature (HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW,
TBD, or NOT FOR AUSTIN) is listed in parentheses.

1. H.350 support to allow clients to auto-config themselves with URI and
password once client has already authenticated to use the WiFi network. [Ben 
T.]
(HIGH)
- Ben T. outlined how this would work: the UA authenticates via the LDAP
directory, and retrieves SIP credentials from that directory. This would 
replace
the MAC address authentication used at the last demo. This would amount to SSO
via LDAP, and should make things easier for the user. Jill Gemmill and Tyler
Johnson have volunteered to help with this. Jiri noted that LDAP is heavily
used, not just in enterprises but in service providers too. Many ISPs keep
subscriber information in LDAP, which makes LDAP-SIP interoperability quite
important. Iptel.org has developed 3 flavors of SER-plus-LDAP; they are not
releasing these as open source, but can make them available for the demo.

2. Highlight SIP.edu reachability with click-to-dial directories of
SIP.edu-enabled schools. [Ben T.]
(HIGH)
- There was general agreement that this would be both good politically and not
hard to do. [AI] Ben T. will seek support for SIP.edu click-to-dial 
directories
at the June 16 SIP.edu workshop. Jiri noted that having hard phones in the
kiosks (as planned) makes this really easy.

3. Kiosks allowing anonymous, configuration-free use. [Ben T.]
(HIGH)

4. Client support for iLBC. [Ben T.]
(TBD)
- Clients and conference servers already exist for this; it's mostly a matter 
of
finding someone to put it all together. Jiri noted that iptel.org has
successfully experimented with this using SIP Express Media Server and SAMS.

5. Client support for location presence fuzzing a la
draft-ietf-geopriv-common-policy-00.txt and draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-01.txt.
[Ben T., Xiaotao]
(TBD)

6. Location-specific resources shown on portal (e.g. URLs to speaker bios,
session evaluation, streaming video). [Ben T.]
(HIGH)

7. Public display of location map, perhaps at special-purpose kiosk. [Joe]
(LOW)
- Not hard to do once the kiosk is set up. An interface-free display is
another possibility.

8. Web-UA; for example a slicker portal with JavaScript and IM. [Candace]
(TBD)

9. Support for small devices (e.g. PocketPCs, Vocera). [Ben T.]
(TBD)
- Ben T. noted that Voceras don't use SIP, so "we're in gateway hell" if we 
try
to support them. On the other hand, there are lots of options for PocketPCs 
and
Linux handhelds.

10. Client and server support for session-based IM [Jamey]
(TBD)

11. Per-room session-based IM chat rooms [Jamey]
(TBD)
- Jamey noted that we need the session-based chat rooms in order to do
session-based IM at all -- otherwise you don't have any way to join and exit.

12. Per-room audio conferences with session-based IM. [Xiaotao]
(NOT FOR AUSTIN)

13. Conference floor control related work. [Xiaotao]
(TBD)

14. Per-organization chat rooms. [Jamey]
(TBD)

15. Push-to-talk (which is just voice-based IM to person or chat rooms). 
[Jamey]
(TBD)

16. SIMPLE/Jabber gateway. [Jamey]
(TBD)
- There was general agreement that creating gateways to non-SIP protocols runs
counter to our overall message. Balkanization is a real concern, and sticking 
to
SIP would help prevent it.

17. Transfer call to/from SIP kiosk based on location. [Jamey]
(TBD)
- Jeremy described this as "an eye-popper" and noted that he's seen it work 
in a
lab setting. There was general agreement that this is likely to be hard to get
to work consistently.

[AI] Joe will send out a note asking people to join teams to work on the 
various
features proposed for Austin. In order to avoid last-minute debugging this 
time
around, Joe will set target completion dates, with items to be dropped if
they're not done in time (there will be a little flexibility for things that 
are
real close to being finished).


Other discussion:

[AI] Ben T. will arrange regular contacts with vendors interested in
participating in the demo (new Internet2 member Avaya in particular). [AI] All
will send Ben T. any information they have on vendors interested in
participating in the demo. Jiri summed up the client requirements: PnP, work
through NATS, and have good codecs (which basically means iLBC).

[AI] Jeremy will formally register the PIC demo with the Austin meeting
planners, noting its special character as one of an ongoing series, and as
something that's woven into the meeting as whole.

[AI] Ben T. will get contacts for the buildout for Austin, and in particular
find out when information on the physical layout of the meeting will be
available.

[AI] Jeremy will send the people on this call an Internet2 draft document on
next steps for presence; all will send comments to him (NOT to the author of 
the
document).

[AI] Joe will send Ben T. specifics on the problem he's having with mail 
missing
from the archive; Ben T. will take this up with the mail admin.