IESG proposed statement on the IETF mission

[James Kempf]

Alistair,

> I think the SIP and 3GPP story is a bit more complex than you make out.
> The so called "mistakes" are basically a set of direct consequences of
3GPP
> strictly following the mobile operator's requirements to maintain a place
> in the value chain and to let them hide certain details of their networks
> from other operators.   How this could be seen as being a "mistake" within
> IETF does raise a few questions about our mechanisms for handling operator
> requirements :-)
>

It is a mistake because the architectural consequences of its assumption of
a particular business model have proven, in the past, to be an inhibitor for
service innovation in other contexts.

> As far as GSC (last meeting was in Ottawa - see
> http://www.tsacc.ca/e/gsc/index.shtml) goes, all I can say is you have
been
> missing something since the last few meetings have been quite interesting
> especially with respect to the use of SIP and other IETF protocols,
midcom,
> etc. within NGN.  Scott has been coming and has been a very useful
> contributor.  I normally atend via "another organisation".
>

I have not checked into this in detail, but I have heard that 3GPP has been
responding positively to IETF suggestions for improving utilization of SIP.
There was a very good and frank technical discussion at the joint meeting in
January this year.

That said, there are a few other areas of concern in some peripherial
support for 3GPP's system, which are not directly under control of 3GPP (I'm
speaking here of GRX). 3GPP has been quite helpful in addressing IETF's
concerns in this area where there is interaction with 3GPP's system, but
since the specifications are not directly under its control, there is only
so much 3GPP can do.

            jak