XCON WG IETF-70 Meeting

1. XCON WGIETF-70 Meeting Centralized Conferencing (XCON) Control Protocol (CCMP)draft-barnes-xcon-ccmp-03 Authors: Mary Barnes (mary.barnes@nortel.com) Chris Boulton (cboulton@avaya.com) Henning Schulzrinne (hgs+xcon@cs.columbia.edu)

2. Contents • Introduction • Background • Changes • Issue Discussion • Way Forward • Comments/Questions

3. Introduction - General • XCON Conference Framework completed as an XCON WG item • XCON Data model almost done • Foundation for protocol development is now solid

4. Document Background • Henning presented a strawman proposal using a simple RPC mechanism (SOAP) for the XCON protocol at IETF-63. • WG chair put forth a challenge to produce protocol proposals by year-end 2005: in parallel Henning and Mary/Chris produced XML based protocol proposals • Attempt to gather input for protocol semantics (“verbs/nouns” adhoc at IETF-65) was not successful • WG re-vectored a few months later (mid-2006) to complete current chartered items, specifically focusing on data model and completing framework. • Early 2007 (IETF-68 timeframe), Mary/Chris protocol document combined with Henning’s.

5. Major changes since -02 version • Removed details about policy. Added a general statement. • Removed section on media control. Added a reference to relevant chartered work in MEDIACTRL. • Renamed "get" operation to "retrieve" to avoid confusion with HTTP GET. • Removed section on "roles". That should be covered in data-model document. • Moved discussion of Conference objectsand identifiers before the protocol operation section, since there were lots of comments/questions about the identifiers from folks in the protocol section. Significantly rewrote the section: • Material was really out of context and confusing (either that or I totally missed what we had intended with that section). • Also, much of it was no longer necessary given the maturity of he XCON data model document has matured (i.e., some of this material was no longer correct and/or redundant).

6. Document Issues/discussion • Document proposes the use of WSDL. Suggestions to use OASIS WSRF and CAMEL (for policy/permissions): • Discussion and feedback from APPS AD in another WG (GEOPRIV) indicates that WSDL has fallen out of favor • Should we remove the WSDL from this document?

7. Document Issues/discussion • Schema is lacking in detail • Is there general support for this approach? • Would folks consider reviewing for consideration as WG document once additional schema detail is added?

8. Document Issues/discussion • Error codes • Current approach follows the SIP/HTTP model of numeric error code and string • Should we follow that approach or define XML tokens for errors? Something like: <xs:simpleType name="response-code-type"> <xs:restriction base="xs:string"> <xs:enumeration value="success"/> <xs:enumeration value="pending"/> <xs:enumeration value=“modified"/> <xs:enumeration value=“badRequest"/> <xs:enumeration value=“unauthorized"/> <xs:enumeration value=“forbidden"/> <xs:enumeration value=“objectNotFound"/> <xs:enumeration value=“methodNotAllowed"/> <xs:enumeration value=“deleteFailedParent"/> <xs:enumeration value=“modifyFailedProtected"/> <xs:enumeration value=“requestTimeout"/> <xs:enumeration value=“serverInternalError"/> <xs:enumeration value=“notImplemented"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType>

9. Way Forward • Update document: • Tidy up front sections (some stale and missing references and stale information) • Continue to add protocol detail • Solicit additional feedback from WG and potential developer community • Propose to add to XCON charter once other WG deliverables are completed

10. ANY COMMENTS/Questions?