Gabor introducing the PAWS BoF. Background: Two I-Ds have been posted. Minutes taker: Basavaraj Patil Jabber scribes : Les Kuku (?) Gabor: How many people have read and understood the PS I-D? Quite many people raised their hands. They have read and understood the PS I-D. Basavaraj presents "Introduction to white space" ------------------------------------------------ No questions Brian's presentation: --------------------- Dirk K.: Do you intend to use other distribution mechanisms? Brian: It is location dependent. You cannot use broadcast mechanisms. Subir: Is the type (On slide handling Mac/Phy independence) tied to every nation? Brian: Not sure. There is some registry that will likely specify it. At least in some nation the contour defines the type. Nation specific type is not clear Jeff Thompson: Is the channel available for exclusive use after querying and getting a response? Brian: No.The channel is available as a shared resource. However long term goals in this area could consider such options. TBD: Brian: 802.11af comes up with an air interface and is applicable in many countries then it would work everywhere. Generally speaking the goal of the IETF is to not require that kind of country and device tie in. TBD: HTTP based querying may be complex for this kind of solution. Brian: Write some text and send to the list. Teco Boot: Decision making can also be on the client. Interference knowledge may be local and can be sent to the server. This could be part of the query semantics. Brian: The DB has knowledge of protected entities. Warren Kumari: Confused by the concept of channel. Brian: Protocol has to have a much more general notion and it could be a frequency range. Serge M.: Does the protocol write or only read to the database? Brian: It is read/query only Basavaraj: As a clarification, there is a requirement to perform authentication in some cases in which case you could consider that to be a sort of write operation Brian: Yes. We may need to work on some authentication aspects as an optional component Gabor's slide on "Related IEEE work" ------------------------------------ - There is work in 802.11af and also 802.22 has specified a new radio technology - There is also co-existence work in .19 where the database work is relevant Charter discussion ------------------- Key points about the charter and the work to be done - The proposal is to work on these as standards track deliverables Alissa Cooper: Privacy considerations are good to have. Suggestion to improve the text about this in the charter Brian: "Robust privacy and security mechanisms" should be used in the charter Yiu Lee: User authentication will be there? Brian: When we get to the requirements there will be a need for some identification. Because in some cases the DB access may not be free. If you think it should be part of the charter we can add it as well. Tim Polk: In addition to privacy and security mechanisms, there are significant security issues. You may want to address the security threats that need to be addressed. Brian: Is it charter material? Tim: Believes that it is charter material. Does not need to be a 4 page charter. Just wants to point out that charter needs to ensure it considers it. Philip Eardley: Charter looks good. Regarding the data model, how do you address the country specific aspects Brian: Thinking very carefully about how the XML data model is specified to ensure that it can be extended as new rules and regulations become available. Most of that is not really an issue. Dan Harkins: Is the DB dynamic? Do you get the same response? Brian: In some countries there is a schedule. Answer to question: You may get different results at different times. Subir: Refering to Scotts question about registration. Will the proposed WG do that part as well Brian: We ought to. The US requires it. The general notion of registration should be optional and part of the charter. Juan Carlos - In ETSI there is RRA group. Is it worth mentioning it in the list as someone we want to liaison with Brian: Sure. Jan someone(Jabber): Can you select a channel before transmission? Brian: Thinks there is potential for such work in the future would be to not charter that activity initially Yiu lee: Use case regarding region. Is there a single database per region Brian: There could be multiple databases Yiu: Do the databases have to be synchronized Brian: Yes. Yiu: How would this be done? Brian: Would like to keep this out of the initial charter. There is less need for the IETF to standardize them. You dont need anything standardized. It would be nice to have but not essential. Jeff Thompson: Is there any anticipation of making the query per region... Making it mobile basically? Brian: There is no work among the regulators to do this. You are getting ahead of the technology. Teco Boot: In this query, it is not single point that has a catalyst of channels. You have to define the area you are in and include transmission power and other parameters Brian: Do we want to do this right away or maybe as an extension? If it is simple we could do it. But otherwise postpone it. Teco: To get permission to transmit at a location the device needs to query first. Brian: It is a highly regulated area Teco: Would prefer to have a rich protocol Jeff Thompson: W.r.t the size of the space owned, the query is for a point and not the larger space? Brian: The protocol should not restrict it to a point. It should be broader (circle, polygons etc.) Questions to BoF ================ Question 1: Is there interest in taking up the work to specify the messaging interface between devices and databases? Hums: Yes: Many No: None Question 2: Is the IETF the right place to do this? Hums: Yes: Many (Louder than the response for Q1) No: None Qusetion 3: How many of you would be willing to work on various I-Ds and helping with reviews? Work on I-Ds: Yes: 11 hands Willing to review: More than 11 + 2 in Jabber Q4: Should a WG be formed Hums: Yes: Even more than response for Q2 And we are done.