RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Hidden Participants

["Chris Boulton" <cboulton@ubiquity.net>]

I agree with Cullen.  I don't have a problem with Hidden participants
BUT 'is legal intercept really in the scope of CPCP?'?

Chris.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:fluffy@cisco.com]
>Sent: 03 February 2004 17:08
>To: Eric Burger; XCON-IETF
>Subject: Re: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Hidden Participants
>
>
>I don't care if we support hidden participants but I feel that the
>requirements for Legal Intercept should definitely be out. There are
way
>too
>many land minds over yonder and it is not the point of this WG to solve
>those.
>
>Cullen
>
>
>
>On 1/20/04 8:00 AM, "Eric Burger" <eburger@snowshore.com> wrote:
>
>> Would Legal Intercept be in or out?  E.g., hidden participants that
>CANNOT be
>> known.
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Drage, Keith (Keith) [mailto:drage@lucent.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 6:14 AM
>>> To: hisham.khartabil@nokia.com; mhammer@cisco.com
>>> Cc: xcon@ietf.org
>>> Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Hidden Participants
>>>
>>>
>>> I believe hidden users are appropriate.
>>>
>>> I do not believe that this adds complexity to the
>>> specifications (particularly to the specification of CPCP),
>>> so I see no need to make it a DEFER as far as the
>>> specifications are concerned. It may add complexity to the
>>> implementation, so I am quite happy to see it a MAY in the
>>> requirements, so that it is optional to implement.
>>>
>>> As regards the legal implications of hidden users, then yes,
>>> there may be priveleged users that are able to request the
>>> identity of hidden users (along with an indication that they
>>> are hidden). This of course requires the enabling of such a
>>> privileged user in the first place.
>>>
>>> Secondly, it may not be necessary to identify hidden users,
>>> but merely that there are hidden users in the conference (in
>>> addition to any that may have made themselves visible). Some
>>> countries require some form of tone or announcement on voice
>>> conferences when someone else is listening in. They also
>>> require an announcement or other indication in the call is
>>> being recorded.
>>>
>>> regards
>>>
>>> Keith
>>>
>>> Keith Drage
>>> Lucent Technologies
>>> drage@lucent.com
>>> tel: +44 1793 776249
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: hisham.khartabil@nokia.com
[mailto:hisham.khartabil@nokia.com]
>>>> Sent: 15 December 2003 16:29
>>>> To: mhammer@cisco.com
>>>> Cc: xcon@ietf.org
>>>> Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Hidden Participants
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: ext Michael Hammer [mailto:mhammer@cisco.com]
>>>>> Sent: 15.December.2003 18:17
>>>>> To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP-MSW/Helsinki)
>>>>> Cc: xcon@ietf.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Hidden Participants
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Related to this is there a requirement that, while not
>>>> revealing the
>>>>> identity of a hidden user, the conference policy contains
>>>>> state indication
>>>>> about either the presence of hidden users, or the
>>>>> possibility/preclusion
>>>>> that such hidden users may be present?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am anticipating that:
>>>>> 1) Laws may exist that require notification of such.
>>>>
>>>> That's a good point. This might require changes to the
>>>> conference event package to indicate if there are hidden
>>>> participants or not, and if so, how many.
>>>>
>>>> The question remain: is there a need for such a feature (to
>>>> hide users?)?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Hisham
>>>>
>>>>> 2) In some conferences, participants may want technical
>>>>> assurance that
>>>>> hidden users are not possible before they speak.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At 02:55 PM 12/15/2003 +0200, hisham.khartabil@nokia.com wrote:
>>>>>> This is in reference to requirements REQ-A7 and REQ-E10 in
>>>>>
>>>>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-reqs-00.txt
>>>>>
>>>>>    REQ-A7: It SHOULD be possible to participate in a
>>> conference as a
>>>>>    hidden user. Hidden user is present in a conference, but
>>>> his presence
>>>>>    is not revealed.
>>>>>
>>>>>    REQ-E10: It MUST be possible to allow and disallow
>>>> hidden membership
>>>>>    in a conference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should a conference policy, using CPCP, specify if a user
>>>> can be hidden?
>>>>> This means that the conference state package does not report the
>>>>> participation on the hidden user. CPCP is used to identify
>>>> which users are
>>>>> hidden. The list of hidden users is only manipulated by a
>>>> privileged user
>>>>> such as the moderator.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Hisham
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> XCON mailing list
>>>>> XCON@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> XCON mailing list
>>> XCON@ietf.org
>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> XCON mailing list
>>> XCON@ietf.org
>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> XCON mailing list
>> XCON@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>XCON mailing list
>XCON@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon


This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl - www.mailcontrol.com

_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon