RE: [VPIM] ID-ACTIONs on UM
Vaudreuil, Greg M (Greg <gregv <at> lucent.com>
2002-03-03 03:47:20 GMT
would like to see more time at the IETF to discuss the launch of this
effort. I suggest we find 1/2 day or so for a "rolling bar bof" to
organize potential topics in advance of the formal voice and fax WG
meetings. One output could be a strawman charter for a new
particularly interested in a working group specifically chartered to augment,
profile, or otherwise create standards that would make it possible to build a
VOICEMAIL telephone user interface that can communicate with a conforming
message store, message submission server, and directory server. The
suported applications would be telephone answering (play greeting, take
message) and message retreival. In my mind, I envison work on IMAP, SMTP,
and an LDAP schema to replicate the current industry-standard
supportive of broading this effort to include telephone user interface
applications to include common unified messaging elements such as the
ability to distinguish between messages of different contexts for the purposes
of sorting, foldering, and notification.
SNAP work is not completed by then, I would expect that work would also fit
within the charter of this group.
am not interested in is a general-porpose "unified messaging" working group
focused on the many other problems in this evolving application space.
That said, I believe the extensions we will require for telephone user interface
usage would be generally useful. I offer this restriction in the
spirit of a narrow focus that has potential to be sucessfully
Crocker [mailto:dcrocker <at> brandenburg.com]
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002
To: Glenn Parsons
Cc: ietf-fax <at> imc.org; IETF VPIM
List; um <at> snowshore.com
Subject: Re: [VPIM] ID-ACTIONs on
At 11:33 AM 2/26/2002 -0500,
Glenn Parsons wrote:
These drafts discuss
some general unified messaging (UM) client issues that I think would be
worth discussing at both the FAX and VPIM WGs.
After some discussion, I suggest we need to decide between the
a) create a new BOF/WG to work on
b) recharter VPIM and/or FAX to work on
c) close and combine VPIM and FAX into a new UM
WG to work on this and remaining VPIM/FAX topics
clear that the VPIM and Fax working groups have been pursuing some topics that
are more generally than the immediate scope of voice or fax messaging.
Consequently, some set of adjustments probably should be made.
their is a considerable danger in making such changes, namely that the
new/integrated effort might have a scope that is not sufficiently clear and/or
is too broad.
Therefore I would strongly suggest that discussion about
a change NOT be based a general discussion but, rather, on a specific proposal
in the form of a draft charter.
If we can agree on charter language
that specifies a clear, concise and useful scope of work, then making the
change will be obviously correct.
ps. I would offer
draft text but do not feel that I know enough about the work that is being
Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker <at> brandenburg.com>