IETF
stir@jabber.ietf.org
Tuesday, July 30, 2013< ^ >
Room Configuration
Room Occupants

GMT+0
[06:49:54] Lorenzo Miniero joins the room
[06:56:08] danyork joins the room
[06:56:10] Simon Romano joins the room
[06:56:49] dyork joins the room
[06:56:59] jgunn joins the room
[06:57:09] pm joins the room
[06:57:22] Alessandro Amirante joins the room
[06:57:24] Steve Mink joins the room
[06:58:40] danyork has set the subject to: STIR BOF - IETF 87
[06:59:01] <danyork> Good morning!
[06:59:34] SM joins the room
[06:59:43] mahoney@nostrum.com joins the room
[07:00:21] Vincent Swart joins the room
[07:00:54] <danyork> Do we have remote attendees here in the chat room?
[07:01:04] <jgunn> good morning.
[07:01:12] <Steve Mink> good morning
[07:01:16] <Vincent Swart> I'm listening in inbetween work
[07:01:18] mikehamilton joins the room
[07:01:44] <jgunn> I am having difficulty getting the audio feed.  Is it just me?
[07:02:14] <Steve Mink> which mode are you using (flash, passive, html5) ?
[07:02:21] <Vincent Swart> I've got this one open but its buzzing loudly: http://nagasaki.bogus.com:8000/stream04
[07:02:36] <Steve Mink> there is slight buzzing on the flash feed
[07:02:43] <Steve Mink> nothing too horrible
[07:02:49] <Lorenzo Miniero> Vincent there's a Meetecho room available for this session FYI http://www.meetecho.com/ietf87/stir
[07:02:52] <jgunn> I just clicked on the link on the agenda page.
[07:03:14] sm joins the room
[07:03:22] <Steve Mink> are you here: http://berlin.conf.meetecho.com/WebLite/index.jsp ?
[07:03:24] <SM> There is a buzz on that audio stream, Janet
[07:03:27] <Lorenzo Miniero> ops just noticed you're already there :)
[07:03:30] <danyork> For those who are remote, I'll be jabber scribing and Peter St. Andre will be assisting.
[07:03:42] Sean Turner joins the room
[07:03:45] Andy Gallant joins the room
[07:03:47] <danyork> If you want anything relayed to the mic please preface it with "mic:"
[07:03:58] Jonathan Lennox joins the room
[07:04:12] <Lorenzo Miniero> I think the buzzing right now might be caused by background noise, the room is large here and there's a lot of people talking
[07:04:26] <jgunn> I am not getting ANY audio.  It says "conneting".  It was working OK yesterdday.
[07:04:47] stpeter joins the room
[07:04:52] <SM> http://ietf87streaming.dnsalias.net/ietf/ietf874.m3u
[07:05:00] <SM> Is that the stream you tried?
[07:05:30] <stpeter> folk, danyork and I will be your jabber relays -- please preface comments to be relayed with "MIC"
[07:05:48] <danyork> The charter we'll be discussing is at: http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/stir/charter/
[07:05:48] <stpeter> the meeting has not yet begun, BTW
[07:05:59] <danyork> Agenda at: http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/87/agenda-87-stir.html
[07:06:03] <stpeter> starting
[07:06:18] <danyork> Materials at: http://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/87/materials.html#stir
[07:06:29] Joe Dobish joins the room
[07:06:40] pm leaves the room
[07:06:56] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: STIR BOF Agenda
[07:06:56] richard.barnes joins the room
[07:06:57] <Lorenzo Miniero> Current presenter: Chairs
[07:06:58] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: STIR BOF Agenda
[07:06:59] Olle E. Johansson joins the room
[07:07:03] <jgunn> Yes, taht is the link.  I get a message
"Windows Media Player cannot find the file ..."
[07:07:06] <stpeter> we also have meetecho: 143HPHF4
[07:07:09] <stpeter> heh
[07:07:18] <stpeter> http://www.meetecho.com/ietf87/stir
[07:07:19] <SM> Let me test it again
[07:07:29] <danyork> We do have remote attendees here, stpeter
[07:07:39] <stpeter> danyork: ok, good
[07:07:44] <Lorenzo Miniero> jgunn you can follow the session here: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf87/stir
[07:07:48] pm joins the room
[07:07:53] <stpeter> are the audio levels OK?
[07:08:07] <Lorenzo Miniero> I'm monitoring the remote stream and it seems ok
[07:08:12] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 2: Agenda – Problem Statement
[07:08:15] <stpeter> Lorenzo Miniero: ok, good
[07:08:19] <SM> Yes, but there is a low noise
[07:08:19] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 3: Agenda – Solution Proposals
[07:08:51] coopdanger joins the room
[07:08:55] <SM> Janet, the standard audio works for me.  Try meetecho as it is on another network
[07:09:03] tsuichi joins the room
[07:09:11] <jgunn> I've got the nagasaki one going, but with a definte buzz.  Thanks Vincent
[07:09:20] martin.thomson joins the room
[07:09:22] resnick joins the room
[07:09:22] <Lorenzo Miniero> yes a bit of bg noise, we'll look into that
[07:09:22] Olafur (Note taker #2) joins the room
[07:09:25] barryleiba joins the room
[07:09:28] yone joins the room
[07:09:35] atle.samuelsen@gmail.com joins the room
[07:09:37] <Vincent Swart> the html5 stream is much better
[07:09:38] <danyork> Now starting Henning's presentation
[07:09:49] <danyork> Slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-stir-3.pptx
[07:09:51] martini joins the room
[07:09:53] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: Agenda – Draft Charter
[07:09:54] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: Agenda – Draft Charter
[07:09:55] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: Agenda – Draft Charter
[07:09:57] <Lorenzo Miniero> Presentation stopped
[07:10:00] hildjj joins the room
[07:10:01] Olle E. Johansson leaves the room
[07:10:20] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: SOURCE IDENTITY  (ORIGIN  AUTHENTICAT
[07:10:22] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 2: 2
[07:10:32] <martin.thomson> skype: URIs
[07:10:51] <martin.thomson> (Insert proprietary identifier) URIs
[07:11:13] <danyork> Overview slide - phone numbers will be with us for a long time - lack of validation is main cause of phone-related criminality and nuisance
[07:11:54] ljarbinet@voxbone.com joins the room
[07:11:59] Gonzalo joins the room
[07:12:00] sftcd joins the room
[07:12:38] Cullen Jennings joins the room
[07:12:39] <danyork> Earlier attempts at origin validation have failed.  The problem is well-defined
[07:12:40] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 3: 3
[07:12:54] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 3: Two modes of caller ID spoofing
[07:12:56] <danyork> Two modes of caller ID spoofing - impersonation and anonymization
[07:13:47] Alex Mayrhofer joins the room
[07:14:21] <Lorenzo Miniero> (audio should be better now)
[07:14:26] <Alex Mayrhofer> static is gone.
[07:14:28] <Alessandro Amirante> way better now!
[07:14:31] pm leaves the room
[07:14:31] Andy Gallant leaves the room
[07:14:37] <danyork> Henning notes that impersonation of 800 numbers is new trend. Winds up with victim paying for the calls of irate people calling into the 800 number to complain about the calls.
[07:14:41] <atle.samuelsen@gmail.com> Awsom! can suddenly hear Henning!
[07:15:01] <danyork> impersonation is spoofing a specific number for a purpose.
[07:15:31] <danyork> Anonymization is spoofing a random number to avoid being blocked or for fraud
[07:15:32] Andy Gallant joins the room
[07:15:37] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: Robocalling
[07:16:08] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 5: Caller ID spoofing
[07:16:21] <Simon Romano> How's audio now?
[07:16:26] <atle.samuelsen@gmail.com> audio is good
[07:16:27] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 6: Legitimate caller ID spoofing
[07:16:37] <jgunn> audio is better
[07:16:40] Ville Hallivuori joins the room
[07:17:06] <Simon Romano> We found that there's a noisy box under the presenter's desk, which is used for audio from the presenter's pc and which is noisy.
[07:17:19] <Simon Romano> Muted now!
[07:17:19] olaf joins the room
[07:17:19] pm joins the room
[07:17:53] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 7: Requirements
[07:18:24] pm leaves the room
[07:18:36] <richard.barnes> +1911?  +49112?
[07:19:03] <danyork> Henning describes the cases where there are legitimate reasons to use a caller ID (call centers, doctors, others with delegated authority to make calls on behalf of someone)
[07:19:29] pm joins the room
[07:19:54] <danyork> Henning: functionality mus work with without human intervention, must survive SBCs
[07:20:04] <Alex Mayrhofer> BTW, legal regulations in Austria is that you can signal any number that you control on any line that you control, as long as the number is "user provided". So, i can legally signal my landline on my mobile, or vice versa.
[07:20:17] <danyork> must allow partial authorized and revocable delegation
[07:20:31] <danyork> must allow number portability - and needs to be secure
[07:20:49] <danyork> Requirements of privacy, efficiency and simplicity
[07:20:52] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 8: Requirements
[07:21:15] pm leaves the room
[07:21:24] <stpeter> Alex Mayrhofer: let us know if you want to relay comments to the mic (preface comment with "MIC") -- unless of course you are in Berlin and can walk to the mic yourself ;-)
[07:21:44] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 9: Not in scope
[07:21:45] <danyork> Efficiency includes not contributing to set up delay
[07:21:54] <Alex Mayrhofer> Peter, thanks. Nah, that was just a "side brabble" :)
[07:22:43] <danyork> Non in scope: non-phone-number identifiers, validation of text in caller ID, cross-national, content protection
[07:23:06] <danyork> Hadriel Kaplan at mic
[07:23:17] <danyork> (I'm thinking I may set that up as a macro)
[07:23:29] <Lorenzo Miniero> :)
[07:23:29] <danyork> Okay... Pete Resnick at mic first
[07:23:42] Simona joins the room
[07:23:43] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 7: Requirements
[07:23:48] <stpeter> Pete Resnick @ mic: must it work with human intervention?
[07:23:48] <danyork> Hadriel is queued
[07:24:11] <stpeter> PR: is requirement set only carrier-to-carrier or also could be user-configurable?
[07:24:20] <danyork> It only took 22 minutes for the questions to start...  :-)
[07:24:37] <danyork> Now... Hadriel Kaplan
[07:24:50] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 9: Not in scope
[07:24:53] <danyork> Not in scope slide
[07:25:08] <danyork> Hadriel: "of course this must work with international calls"
[07:25:16] Laurent jarbinet joins the room
[07:25:32] <danyork> Hadriel: cross-national calls MUST be in scope
[07:25:49] <danyork> Henning: was thinking of it from a deployment point-of-view
[07:26:16] <danyork> Hadriel - no, robocalling is a huge issue with international calls
[07:26:23] <resnick> The plural of anecdote....
[07:26:28] <sftcd> henning's complaint DB might have some level of +1 bias though
[07:26:36] <danyork> Bernard Aboba at mic
[07:26:49] <danyork> Bernard: TDOS attacks are cross-national
[07:27:28] <danyork> Dave Crocker at mic
[07:27:32] <stpeter> Dave Crocker @mic
[07:28:02] <stpeter> Dave: hope we're careful about engineering vs. deployment
[07:28:05] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 8: Requirements
[07:28:18] <stpeter> Dave: performance constraints need to be in requirements
[07:28:27] <danyork> Martin Dolly at mic
[07:28:34] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 9: Not in scope
[07:28:43] <danyork> Martin - international part is important
[07:28:52] <danyork> Martin - TDOS attacks are most dangerous
[07:28:56] ljarbinet@voxbone.com leaves the room: offline
[07:29:07] <resnick> What a strange last name Martin has. Is that spelled "Aiteeandtee"?
[07:29:14] <danyork> Martin - There *are* legitimate uses of robocalling
[07:29:28] <danyork> Bob Moskowitz (Verizon) at mic
[07:29:29] <resnick> And Bob has changed his last name as well....
[07:30:04] <danyork> Bob - European operators are being polite... crossnational issues are huge
[07:30:58] <danyork> Bob - community outbound calling services are used widely
[07:31:03] <danyork> Hannes Tschofenig at mic
[07:31:22] <danyork> Hannes - incremental deployment is good
[07:31:59] <stpeter> Philippe Fouquart @ mic
[07:32:33] <Steve Mink> can Philippe step closer to the mic?
[07:32:40] olaf leaves the room
[07:33:06] <danyork> Hadriel Kaplan at mic
[07:33:19] <danyork> "I don't want to belabor the point, but I will anyway" ;-)
[07:33:29] Xinpeng Wei joins the room
[07:33:51] <danyork> Hadriel - it's going to be a lot of work to get this deployed, so it needs to work internationally!
[07:34:37] <Lorenzo Miniero> Ops that slide did not import well
[07:35:17] <danyork> Henning describing the changes in the environment
[07:35:34] <jgunn> which slide are we on?
[07:35:49] Dave Martin joins the room
[07:35:51] <Cullen Jennings> think it says slide 14 at top
[07:35:58] <danyork> "Changes in Environment"
[07:36:01] <danyork> a big table
[07:36:06] <jgunn> got it
[07:36:27] <Cullen Jennings> now on slide 15
[07:36:30] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 15: What makes solutions harder than in 2002
[07:36:33] <danyork> Slide: What makes solutions harder than in 2002?
[07:36:36] Dave Martin leaves the room
[07:36:52] <Cullen Jennings> lol - 3 ways to name the slide - now we see why this is hard
[07:37:02] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 16: Changes opportunities
[07:37:13] Xinpeng Wei leaves the room
[07:37:14] <danyork> E.164 numbers vs SIP URIs, failure of ENUM, used of B2BUAs, SS7 still around
[07:37:21] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 17: Basic architecture
[07:37:34] <danyork> Opportunities - mobile, IP-PBX and trunking, PKI developments like DANE
[07:37:42] olaf joins the room
[07:37:46] <danyork> Henning now showing the obligatory network chart
[07:38:25] <stpeter> Dave Crocker @ mic
[07:38:49] <stpeter> Dave: the architecture seems to preclude signing by calling phone
[07:39:07] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 18: Options
[07:39:09] <stpeter> Henning: agreed, that should be possible
[07:39:18] <Lorenzo Miniero> (that didn't import well either...)
[07:39:28] <Lorenzo Miniero> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-stir-3.pptx
[07:39:36] <danyork> Henning - the STIR mailing list probably set a record for the level of pre-BOF discussion :-D
[07:39:49] <danyork> Showing an overview of different proposals
[07:39:59] mikehamilton leaves the room
[07:40:09] Alex Mayrhofer 2 joins the room
[07:40:17] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 19: Certificate models
[07:40:22] <sftcd> I don't think that the list consensus was that all reasonable solutions could co-exist, but just that they were all reasonable
[07:40:24] <danyork> (my inbox is still seriously hurting from the STIR DoS of the past few weeks)
[07:40:40] Alex Mayrhofer 2 leaves the room
[07:40:49] <richard.barnes> danyork: M(ail)DOS, like TDOS?
[07:40:57] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 20: delegation options
[07:41:13] <danyork> richard.barnes: :-)
[07:41:27] <danyork> "Known unknowns" - great title
[07:41:27] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 21: Known unknowns
[07:41:42] <danyork> "who will sign first, by choice or mandate?"
[07:41:48] <danyork> "who will *validate* first?"
[07:42:37] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 22: Incremental deployment
[07:43:31] <martin.thomson> yay, the budget turing test
[07:43:39] <danyork> Martin Dolly at mic   (another macro I should set up)
[07:44:03] <danyork> Martin - we can only "stop" a call with a customers permission
[07:44:17] <danyork> Martin - we can't stop ever without permissio
[07:44:22] <danyork> Cullen Jennings at mic
[07:44:36] Wendy Seltzer joins the room
[07:44:38] <Lorenzo Miniero> SLide 23: Conclusion
[07:44:42] <danyork> Cullen - IP-PBX vendors may be one of first to sign
[07:44:56] <danyork> Henning - "Number spoofing is root of (almost) all phone evil"
[07:45:02] <stpeter> I hope we all recognize that the little CAPTCHA thing at the bottom left of that slide is utterly useless...
[07:45:39] <martin.thomson> stpeter: it's worse than that, it's probably just an annoyance
[07:45:51] <danyork> stpeter: agreed!
[07:46:03] <martin.thomson> sorry, *also* an annoyance
[07:46:05] <stpeter> martin.thomson: that, too
[07:46:10] <danyork> Henning - All in for one approach or multiple solutions?
[07:46:17] <stpeter> Sanjay Mishra @ mic
[07:46:24] mikehamilton joins the room
[07:46:39] Olle E. Johansson joins the room
[07:46:52] <danyork> Mic lines queueing....
[07:47:14] <danyork> Hannes Tschofenig at mic
[07:47:25] <martin.thomson> I have to say, after having moved to the US, the telephone system in the US is uniquely crappy.  It's a cesspool.
[07:47:44] <danyork> Hannes - WCIT brought out many concerns from countries around the world
[07:47:48] mikehamilton leaves the room
[07:48:08] olaf leaves the room
[07:48:13] <danyork> Hannes - call fraud huge issue by many other countries
[07:48:18] <stpeter> Wolfgang Beck @ mic
[07:48:53] <stpeter> WB: you're saying that CAs are better at validating phone numbers than phone companies?
[07:49:06] dcrocker joins the room
[07:49:32] mikehamilton joins the room
[07:49:54] <stpeter> Henning: not the same model as DNS-based PKI model -- likely signing entity would be built into authority system
[07:50:04] <danyork> Eric Burger at mic
[07:50:20] <danyork> Chair: "Please be brief, both in terms of a question and a response"
[07:50:45] <danyork> Eric - bullet #2 - "Number spoofing may accelerate decay of PSTN" - important
[07:51:04] <danyork> Eric - maybe we should just let the PSTN decay and die!
[07:51:15] <stpeter> Klaus Nieminen @ mic
[07:51:26] <Jonathan Lennox> Hadriel, off-mic: yeah, because e-mail doesn't have this problem at all.
[07:51:43] <dcrocker> Henning's diagram of DNS vs. Certs is a useful start; for completeness, it's probably worth making it even more complicated with the option that has been raised -- Certs in the DNS...
[07:51:52] <danyork> Richard Shockey at mic
[07:52:19] mikehamilton leaves the room
[07:52:21] <danyork> Richard - we have to recognize that other governments take a very different view on robocalling
[07:52:28] =JeffH joins the room
[07:52:36] <stpeter> Philippe Fouquart @ mic
[07:52:49] Simona leaves the room
[07:52:50] <Jonathan Lennox> I think Richard's comment was about caller-id spoofing, not robocalling per se.
[07:52:50] <danyork> Richard - there will need to be coordination with governments and legislatures
[07:52:57] <richard.barnes> who is at the mic?
[07:53:05] <richard.barnes> philippe?
[07:53:06] <stpeter> Philippe Fouquart
[07:53:07] <danyork> <stpeter> Philippe Fouquart @ mic
[07:53:10] <stpeter> as I said :P
[07:53:11] <dcrocker> Also, that DNS/CERT diagram targets implementation choices, but the other diagram we need, which was also raised on the list and hinted at today, is the mapping between the number-assignment authorities and the validation authorities who maintain the keys that are used.
[07:53:12] <danyork> Hadriel Kaplan
[07:53:12] <richard.barnes> thx
[07:53:39] <danyork> Jonathan Lennox: yes, thank you... Richard was talking about "caller ID spoofing"
[07:54:12] <danyork> Hadriel - hierarchy of telephony has changed in the US.  chain of trust is broken.
[07:54:22] mikehamilton joins the room
[07:54:41] <danyork> Hadriel - if phone worked like email, you'd throw your phone away
[07:54:49] <danyork> Hadriel - this is a tool that is part of the solution
[07:54:52] <danyork> Steve Kent at mic
[07:55:16] <resnick> Can someone get the floor mic's volume turned up?
[07:55:26] Simon Romano leaves the room
[07:55:32] <danyork> Steve Kent - one should not confuse the terrible state of CAs in the web environment with how a PKI could really be implemented
[07:56:08] <Olle E. Johansson> Do we need to wait for country-level legislators or should we be able to deploy as a carrier before they sign?
[07:56:17] <danyork> Steve - environments like DANE and RPKI provide a different view
[07:56:24] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: Identity in SIP (and in-band)
[07:56:27] <danyork> Jon Peterson now up to speak
[07:56:30] <Lorenzo Miniero> Current presenter: Jon Peterson
[07:56:31] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: Identity in SIP (and in-band)
[07:56:35] <stpeter> remote folks: how is the audio
[07:56:38] <atle.samuelsen@gmail.com> Olle: I think we should be able to deploy as a carrier before they sign.
[07:56:57] <stpeter> is Jon too quiet?
[07:57:25] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 2: In-band precedents
[07:57:44] <danyork> Slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-stir-4.pptx
[07:58:04] Andrew Sullivan joins the room
[07:58:27] <danyork> Talking about RFC 3325 and 4474
[07:59:36] <danyork> Jon - VIPR tried to solve this problem, too
[07:59:41] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 3: Components of an in-band solution
[08:00:08] <danyork> Jon - you need a field to carry a signature over various headers in a SIP request
[08:01:06] <danyork> Jon - you need a way to acquire and validate the public key of the signer over those headers
[08:01:17] <danyork> Jon - we thought there would be public ENUM
[08:02:03] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: In-band STIR Logical Architecture
[08:02:10] <danyork> Jon - we generally agree on these two points
[08:02:32] <danyork> Jon now showing his version of the network diagram
[08:02:37] Olle E. Johansson leaves the room
[08:03:14] Sean Turner leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[08:03:15] Sean Turner joins the room
[08:03:23] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 5: Revisiting what?
[08:03:39] <danyork> Jon - which RFC4474 assumptions failed?
[08:03:46] Juan-Pedro Cerezo Martin joins the room
[08:04:05] Juan-Pedro Cerezo Martin leaves the room
[08:04:08] <danyork> Jon - SIP deployments remain focused on PSTN interworking
[08:04:47] =JeffH leaves the room
[08:04:50] <danyork> Jon - telephone numbers are the primary identifiers of ISP (which was not expected)
[08:04:54] <danyork> Jon - lack of unmediated end-to-end SIP signaling
[08:04:54] =JeffH joins the room
[08:05:16] <stpeter> bad presenter, no slide numbers!
[08:06:08] <danyork> Jon - RFC4474 solved for SIP requests in general - not tailored for INVITEs
[08:06:09] <Lorenzo Miniero> "I'm not a number, I'm a free slide!"
[08:06:20] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 6: Rescoping to the Problem
[08:06:20] <stpeter> Lorenzo Miniero: :-)
[08:06:30] <dcrocker> so... you can't be validated?
[08:07:39] <danyork> Jon - how best to separate the replay-protection goal from the man-in-the-middle protection goal?
[08:08:22] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 7: Limits of in-band
[08:09:06] <danyork> Jon - in-band addresses SIP-to-SIP use case ... not going to help with SIP-to-PSTN, PSTN-to-PSTN
[08:09:37] <danyork> Jon - will SIP networks allow it?  Will it survive deployments?  needs to change existing service behavior
[08:10:09] <danyork> Jon - it's been difficult to anticipate what changes are needed by devices within the SIP infrastructure
[08:10:59] <stpeter> Dave Crocker @ mic
[08:11:10] =JeffH leaves the room
[08:11:18] =JeffH joins the room
[08:11:39] <danyork> (could we have simplified mic lines by supplying individual mics to a few of the individuals?)
[08:11:58] <stpeter> Dave: the model you have here is similar to DKIM and folks might want to look at that
[08:12:01] <danyork> (for those who are remote, the mic lines are predictably queueing)
[08:12:11] martin.thomson leaves the room
[08:12:51] <danyork> Eric Burger at mic
[08:13:22] <danyork> Eric - do we need a solution that is better than what the PSTN had 5 years ago?
[08:13:32] <dcrocker> Just to be careful with the reference to DKIM:  I'm citing similarity in the signing mechanism; the issue of key management is an open controversy here and I wasn't commenting on that.
[08:14:04] <dcrocker> In particular, here, I'm noting that the choice of what fields to hash, for the signature, is a bit more challenging that Jon's presentation implied.
[08:14:06] <danyork> Eric - if we don't have to be better than what PSTN was 5 years ago, then this *does* help with SIP-to-PSTN interworking
[08:14:51] Olle E. Johansson joins the room
[08:15:07] <danyork> Jon - the assumption has been that when the call enters the PSTN it re-enters the PSTN "trust model"
[08:15:12] <danyork> Henning responding at mic
[08:15:19] <Olle E. Johansson> carriers are not what carriers used to be. The definition of a "carrier" five years ago is not the same as today.
[08:15:23] <stpeter> Henning Schulzrinne @ mic
[08:15:34] <danyork> Henning - there are cases where things get simpler
[08:16:05] <danyork> Henning - if you do validation in the network, carrier has to make decision without interaction with the customer before passing that on to the PSTN
[08:16:33] <danyork> Henning - carriers can't tell other carriers who their customers are
[08:17:02] <stpeter> Hadriel Kaplan @ mic
[08:17:03] <danyork> Hadriel at mic
[08:17:12] Corrado Mella joins the room
[08:17:19] <stpeter> Hadriel: this slide gets into "why out of band at all"?
[08:17:21] =JeffH leaves the room
[08:17:28] =JeffH joins the room
[08:18:07] <stpeter> Hadriel: we're looking for something that can be delivered soon, but realistically we're talking about 2-3 years, at which point implementers start writing code, etc.
[08:18:41] <stpeter> Hadriel: it will be 3-4-5 years before there is any deployment
[08:18:54] Corrado Mella leaves the room
[08:19:07] <stpeter> Hadriel: the kind of people who would deploy whatever we define would be moving to SIP anyway
[08:19:09] <resnick> Do I understand correctly that Jon is talking about in-band passing of the credential, but not necessarily in-band deployment and distribution of the credentials?
[08:19:16] Corrado Mella joins the room
[08:19:29] <danyork> Hadriel - "*Someone* has been deploying 1000s of SBCs"
[08:21:02] <danyork> Hadriel - let's focus on the people who are actually going to deploy this
[08:21:06] <stpeter> Cullen Jennings @ mic
[08:21:17] <danyork> Cullen Jennings at mic
[08:21:34] Corrado Mella leaves the room
[08:21:45] <danyork> Cullen - what we care about is what can sign that will survive the SBCs
[08:22:30] <stpeter> Hannes Tschofenig @ mic
[08:22:57] <danyork> Hannes supporting Cullen's viewpoint
[08:22:57] <stpeter> Hannes: agree with Cullen
[08:23:00] <stpeter> heh
[08:23:04] <danyork> :-)
[08:23:35] <danyork> Martin Thompson at mic
[08:23:47] <resnick> Nobody wants to answer my question. :-(
[08:24:20] <danyork> Martin - I work for a company that doesn't use SIP for large parts of a network
[08:24:40] <danyork> Brian Rosen speaking from chair's table
[08:25:28] <danyork> Martin - the point is that we are moving to "IP" - not everyone will be moving to SIP
[08:26:01] <danyork> Martin mentions that WebRTC is another body of players
[08:26:02] <Lorenzo Miniero> Presentation stopped
[08:26:13] <danyork> EKR now coming up to talk about out-of-band
[08:26:16] <sftcd> don't worry it'll start and probably with some speed
[08:26:20] <stpeter> I missed the Bob Marley music before the BoF started
[08:26:22] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: STIR Out-of-band Mechanism draft-rescorl
[08:26:28] martini leaves the room
[08:26:31] <danyork> Slides - http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-stir-5.pdf
[08:26:32] lllmartini joins the room
[08:26:50] <stpeter> Eric Rescorla presenting
[08:27:15] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 2: Assumptions
[08:27:57] =JeffH leaves the room
[08:28:06] =JeffH joins the room
[08:28:58] martin.thomson joins the room
[08:29:05] Olle E. Johansson leaves the room
[08:29:22] Barry Leiba joins the room
[08:29:26] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 3: Basic Setting
[08:29:29] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: Alternate Setting
[08:29:34] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 5: Credentials
[08:30:15] <martin.thomson> There's an important distinction made for the PBX cases, and that is that the connection from phone to PBX carries a lot of trust.
[08:30:26] barryleiba leaves the room
[08:31:13] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 6: System Architecture
[08:31:16] <stpeter> martin.thomson: good point
[08:32:10] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[08:32:13] <danyork> martin.thomson: It *can* carry a lot of trust, assuming that correct authentication of endpoints is in place. (I've spent too long dealing with poorly configured IP-PBXs)
[08:32:17] lllmartini joins the room
[08:32:20] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 7: Call Flow
[08:32:21] Andrew Sullivan leaves the room
[08:33:35] <martin.thomson> danyork: of course, there are all sorts of possibilities here with respect to what trust is carried and how, but the operational issues are probably innumerable
[08:33:51] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[08:34:07] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 8: Don’t I know you from somewhere?
[08:34:11] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 7: Call Flow
[08:34:51] <danyork> martin.thomson: agreed
[08:35:19] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 8: Don’t I know you from somewhere?
[08:35:21] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 9: Oh, yeah, that’s right
[08:35:23] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 10: Relationship to In-band
[08:35:28] lllmartini joins the room
[08:36:20] Jon Baker joins the room
[08:36:30] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 11: Questions?
[08:36:41] <stpeter> Wolfgang Beck @ mic
[08:36:53] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[08:36:59] lllmartini joins the room
[08:37:22] <danyork> Predictably, mic line is queuing again :-)
[08:37:24] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[08:37:26] lllmartini joins the room
[08:37:31] <danyork> Martin Dolly at mic
[08:38:03] <danyork> Martin - there are rural areas that are going to have the PSTN forever, but the majority of traffic will move to IP
[08:38:21] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[08:38:22] lllmartini joins the room
[08:38:37] <danyork> Martin - there is an economic motivation to get rid of the circuit switched infrastructure
[08:39:03] <danyork> Martin - the dialer is one of the most secure apps on the phone - you don't want that exposed to others
[08:40:12] <danyork> Hadriel Kaplan at mic
[08:40:28] <stpeter> Hadriel: only one root CPS?
[08:40:54] <stpeter> ekr: that's delving into details, but not necessary
[08:41:08] <danyork> 9 people in mic queue
[08:41:40] <danyork> Hadriel thinks out-of-band should be out of the group
[08:41:43] <danyork> Eric Burger at mic
[08:42:04] <danyork> Eric - we need a system that can handle 3-4 billion requests a day
[08:42:20] <danyork> Eric - we need to ensure performance - and it has to work *the first time*
[08:42:31] <martin.thomson> That doesn't sound like a set of unmanageable numbers.
[08:43:02] <danyork> Eric views the time budget as 15 milliseconds
[08:43:20] <martin.thomson> Eric Rescorla finds that laughable
[08:43:27] <danyork> EKR - from a load perspective the load is nothing
[08:43:40] <stpeter> Steve Kent @ mic
[08:44:15] <stpeter> Steve: (1) this is just like iMessage, but that is a monolithic environment
[08:44:50] <stpeter> Steve: (2) third parties for credentials? that hasn't worked out so well
[08:45:15] <stpeter> Steve: (3) the timeframe might not be that bad, people don't necessarily wait until after the RFC is out (depends on economic incentives)
[08:45:29] <danyork> Steve Kent - if there is no economic incentive it doesn't matter what we do here
[08:45:31] <danyork> Cullen at mic
[08:45:41] =JeffH leaves the room
[08:45:52] =JeffH joins the room
[08:45:55] <danyork> Cullen - we would of course implement this prior to RFC if it looked like it would be useful
[08:45:59] <atle.samuelsen@gmail.com> just look at the draft for remote-party-id..
[08:46:16] <danyork> Cullen - on a web-scale, this is trivial to implement
[08:46:27] <danyork> Cullen - it's definitely buildable
[08:46:28] <stpeter> Dave Crocker @ mic
[08:47:14] <stpeter> Dave: question is about how much experience we have to deploy something like this at scale
[08:47:43] <stpeter> Dave: examples adduced so far are monolithic, not federated / decentralized
[08:47:55] <richard.barnes> i thought the reason the internet was fun was that we're always doing things we have no experience doing :)
[08:48:21] <stpeter> Dave: this is not trivial and not straightforward
[08:48:26] atle.samuelsen@gmail.com leaves the room
[08:48:59] Laurent jarbinet leaves the room
[08:49:00] <danyork> Jon Peterson at mic
[08:49:48] <danyork> Jon - we want a distributed model
[08:50:30] <danyork> Jon - we need to preserve the "logical authority"
[08:50:41] <danyork> Jon - we're not in a position to dictate the enrollment model
[08:51:02] <danyork> Jon - national regulators may dictate how it happens
[08:51:51] <danyork> Jon - we want to ensure that there is one entity with responsibility for each number - we don't want to get into nightmare of having multiple entities having responsibility for the same number
[08:51:54] =JeffH leaves the room
[08:52:01] =JeffH joins the room
[08:52:09] <stpeter> Henning Schulzrinne @ mic
[08:52:26] <stpeter> Henning: there are already commerical systems for calling number validation
[08:53:01] <stpeter> Henning: typically on smartphones, event-based system on inbound calls using an app that you download
[08:53:40] <stpeter> Henning: as to system scaling, I don't think it needs to happen in real time, post-dialing requirement of 10 seconds, adding a second is not critical
[08:54:03] <stpeter> Henning: also, change frequency is low so caching is feasible
[08:55:00] <danyork> Martin Dolly at mic
[08:55:12] <stpeter> Henning: so I think the scaling issues are better addressed if we separate out the real time needs from the things that can be done more slowly
[08:55:22] <danyork> Martin - doesn't think from a scope perspective that it is in-band vs out-of-band
[08:55:40] <danyork> Martin - but thinks from a milestone perspective in-band is first
[08:55:51] <danyork> (perfect segue... )
[08:56:05] <stpeter> hums
[08:56:06] <Lorenzo Miniero> Presentation stopped
[08:56:25] <danyork> Do we believe this is ready for engineering?
[08:56:29] <stpeter> first hum: if we choose to do this work, do we think that it's ready for engineering?
[08:56:49] <danyork> Hum in favor overwhelming
[08:56:54] <stpeter> feel free to hum from the chatroom
[08:57:10] <stpeter> second hum: is there some or all of this problem that the IETF should take on?
[08:57:11] <danyork> Second hum - is there some or all of this problem that the IETF should take on?
[08:57:15] <danyork> ha
[08:57:33] <danyork> Overwhelming that we should do something
[08:57:50] <danyork> Slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-stir-7.pptx
[08:58:24] <danyork> Side note - is there a blue sheet going around?  (or is there not one because this is a BOF?)
[08:58:35] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: STIR Charter (discussion)
[08:58:41] <Lorenzo Miniero> Current presenter: Jon Peterson
[08:58:42] <sftcd> blue sheets recirculating
[08:58:43] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 1: STIR Charter (discussion)
[08:59:11] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 2: For reference
[08:59:27] atle.samuelsen joins the room
[08:59:30] <danyork> Charter is also at http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/stir/charter/
[08:59:35] Jon Baker leaves the room
[08:59:49] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 3: Preamble
[09:00:07] <stpeter> if remote folks have comments on the charter, we can relay them to the mic
[09:00:36] <stpeter> Eric Burger @ mic
[09:00:39] <martin.thomson> nit: SWATTING isn't strictly large scale
[09:01:10] <stpeter> martin.thomson: just large impact
[09:01:35] <martin.thomson> Right.  When the SWAT team shoots you, you don't really get much more of an impact than that
[09:01:36] <stpeter> Eric: I think a lot of the things in the preamble won't be an issue 3-5 years from now
[09:01:54] Ville Hallivuori leaves the room
[09:01:55] <martin.thomson> But it's hard to get the national guard called in.
[09:02:22] <resnick> (Side rant about the hum: Russ missed something. On each question after the hum, he should have asked, "That sounded like overwhelming consensus for FOO.  But there were a few hums against. Does anyone have a showstopper objection to going forward that they don't think has been heard and considered in the room?" End of grump.)
[09:02:26] <stpeter> Eric: SBCs broke the network, let's fix it
[09:02:52] <stpeter> Jon: no, these are the problems we're trying to solve these listed problems
[09:03:33] <stpeter> resnick: get that RFC published on the meaning of consensus :P
[09:03:38] <stpeter> Dave Crocker @ mic
[09:04:16] <stpeter> Dave: maybe add something about being able to complete the request during call setup time
[09:04:54] <martin.thomson> resnick: nothing stopping you from asking the question yourself
[09:04:58] <resnick> @psa: You are my ass-kicker. And this is good.
[09:05:15] <stpeter> Dan York @ mic
[09:05:24] <dcrocker> Draft Charter - suggested replacement for the last sentence of the first paragraph: This working group will define a mechanism that can perform verification within call-setup time, confirming the authorization of the calling party to use a particular telephone number.
[09:05:58] <stpeter> Dan: agreed on deployability, we are looking to do something sooner rather than later, need to be very focused on ruling things out
[09:06:35] <stpeter> resnick: happy to co-author and get the damn thing done :P
[09:06:40] <stpeter> Johnathan Lennox @ mic
[09:07:18] <stpeter> Jonathan: we can't depend on magic, need to have WG consensus that someone else is going to do something on our behalf
[09:07:26] <stpeter> Sanjay Mishra @ mic
[09:07:53] <stpeter> Sanjay: I think it's helpful to have something about deployability in the charter
[09:08:02] <danyork> Cullen at mic
[09:08:25] <danyork> Cullen to chairs - when do we have discussion on which approach is deployable?
[09:08:33] <danyork> Steve Kent at mic
[09:09:13] <danyork> Steve Kent - we need an architecture that understands assumptions
[09:09:21] =JeffH leaves the room
[09:09:28] =JeffH joins the room
[09:10:12] urso@jabber.de joins the room
[09:10:48] <danyork> Steve back at mic
[09:10:48] Dan Wing joins the room
[09:10:52] <danyork> Hannes Tschofenig at mic
[09:10:56] urso@jabber.de leaves the room
[09:11:11] <danyork> Hannes - for emergency services case we have a separate document
[09:11:19] Steffen Siering joins the room
[09:11:29] <stpeter> Orit Levin @ mic
[09:11:58] <stpeter> Orit: what is the scope of the "calling party"?
[09:12:29] <stpeter> Jon: the number that is rendered to the person whose phone rings
[09:12:46] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 4: Postamble
[09:13:10] <danyork> (Interesting point about how we in the RAI area probably use "calling party" with certain assumptions about what that means.)
[09:14:02] <stpeter> Jonathan Lennox @ mic
[09:14:32] damencho joins the room
[09:14:51] <stpeter> Jonathan: again, concerned about alignment of incentives
[09:14:57] <stpeter> Brian: please send text
[09:15:07] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 5: The plan (wall o’ text)
[09:15:13] <danyork> (note: we have 15 minutes and a ton of text still to go...)
[09:15:19] <dcrocker> the question we just heard about calling party also highlights some additional ambiguity in that last sentence.  So I suggest:  This working group will define a mechanism that can be readily deployed, to perform verification within call-setup time, confirming the authorization of the calling party to specify the number used as Caller-ID.
[09:16:15] <danyork> dcrocker: only issue there is that "Caller-ID" is probably a specific term used
[09:16:18] <danyork> Cullen at mic
[09:16:23] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 6: Limitations and Warranties
[09:16:27] <danyork> Cullen - what do we do next?
[09:16:54] <danyork> Hadriel at mic
[09:17:27] <dcrocker> from the list, it's looked as if "caller-id" is a useful term that people generally understand similarly.  failing that, we need a /very/ precise referrent, and I'm not the one to produce that.
[09:17:42] <danyork> Lucy Lynch at mic
[09:17:45] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 7: Disclaimers and Pleasantries
[09:18:05] <danyork> Lucy - the *punt* on privacy implications makes me extremely uncomfortable
[09:18:13] <danyork> Lucy - and it *is* a punt!
[09:18:28] <danyork> EKR at mic
[09:19:07] <danyork> Richard Shockey at mic - we've got 10 mins
[09:19:11] <Lorenzo Miniero> Slide 9: Outputs
[09:19:36] <danyork> Steve Kent at mic
[09:19:44] <stpeter> Richard: think out of band is undeployable
[09:20:02] Barry Leiba leaves the room
[09:20:06] <danyork> Steve - deliverables should include a threat model
[09:20:14] <stpeter> Eric Burger @ mic
[09:20:17] <danyork> Steve - Deliverables should include a privacy document
[09:20:32] =JeffH leaves the room
[09:20:40] =JeffH joins the room
[09:20:56] <stpeter> Eric: can we focus on in-band and then recharter to do out-of-band?
[09:21:14] <stpeter> Hadriel @ mic
[09:21:14] <danyork> Hadriel Kaplan at mic
[09:21:25] <stpeter> Hadriel: we can recharter after in-band
[09:21:52] <danyork> Hadriel - get it out of the charter
[09:22:03] <stpeter> Bernard Aboba @ mic
[09:22:03] <danyork> Bernard Aboba at mic - agree with Hadriel
[09:22:23] <danyork> Bernard - need to be clear on IP-PSTN interconnections and implications
[09:22:29] <stpeter> Dave Crocker @ mic
[09:22:56] coopdanger leaves the room
[09:23:01] <danyork> Dave - go narrow and quick
[09:23:01] <stpeter> Dave: we've done better when we've gone small and quick
[09:23:05] <danyork> :-)
[09:23:12] <stpeter> Dave: focus on a part that's useful quickly
[09:23:44] <stpeter> Dave: if we try to work on both at the same time, we will fail at both
[09:23:54] hildjj leaves the room
[09:24:00] <danyork> Cullen at mic
[09:24:14] <danyork> Cullen - inband and out-of-band needs to be done at the same time
[09:24:25] <danyork> Cullen - otherwise solutions will be out of sync
[09:24:34] coopdanger joins the room
[09:24:55] hildjj joins the room
[09:25:17] <danyork> (5 minutes remaining)
[09:26:13] <danyork> Cullen making point that mobile vendors could roll out out-of-band solution quickly
[09:26:41] =JeffH leaves the room
[09:26:49] =JeffH joins the room
[09:27:00] <danyork> Cullen - o-o-b deployment could then put pressure on others to deploy in-band solutions
[09:27:32] <danyork> Cullen - IP-PBXs could deploy this rapidly
[09:27:37] <danyork> Martin Dolly at mic
[09:27:58] <danyork> Martin disagrees with Cullen
[09:28:02] <stpeter> Klaus Nieminen @ mic
[09:28:08] <danyork> Martin - inband would be deployed faster
[09:28:59] <danyork> EKR at mic
[09:29:10] <danyork> EKR - we need to design both at mic
[09:29:16] <stpeter> Klaus: what I really care about is that mobile operator can validate VoIP, and IP-PBX is connected to the network
[09:29:27] <danyork> EKR - if we are going to throw one under the bus, it should be inband
[09:29:51] <stpeter> Sanjay Mishra @ mic
[09:30:07] <stpeter> Sanjay: the in-band solution needs to be looked at
[09:30:12] <danyork> Adam Roach at mic -
[09:30:17] <danyork> Adam - what Cullen said
[09:30:36] <danyork> Richard Shockey at mic
[09:31:02] <stpeter> Jeremy Fuller @ mic
[09:31:04] damencho leaves the room
[09:31:18] <danyork> Richard - supports inband first
[09:31:32] <stpeter> Jeremy: big issue is universality of deployment, working on two at once leads to dithering on deployment
[09:31:38] <danyork> Hadriel Kaplan at mic
[09:32:16] <danyork> Eric Burger at mic
[09:32:22] <danyork> (into negative time)
[09:32:28] <stpeter> Eric: we've worked on in-band and we've failed
[09:32:34] sftcd leaves the room
[09:32:41] Dan Wing leaves the room
[09:32:53] <stpeter> Eric: you get Apple and Google to do something, and you get a solution but it's direct over-the-top
[09:32:57] Alessandro Amirante leaves the room
[09:33:04] <stpeter> Eric: hand it to the ITU
[09:33:11] <stpeter> it's about preserving the PSTN
[09:33:18] <danyork> Hums
[09:33:18] <stpeter> hums!
[09:33:22] <danyork> 4-way hum
[09:33:31] <danyork> inband only
[09:33:34] <danyork> outbound only
[09:33:41] <danyork> inband then outofband
[09:33:44] <Steve Mink> hum
[09:34:01] <danyork> inband and outofband together
[09:34:50] <danyork> Cullen - strongly objects to lack of time
[09:35:01] dcrocker leaves the room
[09:35:01] <stpeter> inband and in+out simultaneously had roughly equal support
[09:35:46] richard.barnes leaves the room
[09:35:48] <danyork> Thank you all
[09:35:49] martin.thomson leaves the room
[09:35:50] <stpeter> hums on "could you live with both" and "could you not live with both"
[09:35:54] resnick leaves the room
[09:35:55] SM leaves the room
[09:35:57] <stpeter> more support for the former than the latter
[09:35:59] sm leaves the room
[09:36:00] <stpeter> meeting is ended
[09:36:02] <Lorenzo Miniero> Presentation stopped
[09:36:05] Sean Turner leaves the room
[09:36:18] Steve Mink leaves the room
[09:36:18] danyork leaves the room
[09:36:18] dyork leaves the room
[09:36:19] yone leaves the room
[09:36:19] <stpeter> see you all on the list :-)
[09:36:19] =JeffH leaves the room: Logged out
[09:36:19] Cullen Jennings leaves the room
[09:36:25] hildjj leaves the room
[09:36:25] Olafur (Note taker #2) leaves the room
[09:36:33] stpeter leaves the room
[09:36:47] Vincent Swart leaves the room
[09:36:50] Andy Gallant leaves the room
[09:36:53] Joe Dobish leaves the room
[09:36:55] tsuichi leaves the room
[09:36:55] Gonzalo leaves the room
[09:36:55] mikehamilton leaves the room
[09:37:30] Lorenzo Miniero leaves the room
[09:38:07] jgunn leaves the room
[09:38:55] Jonathan Lennox leaves the room
[09:44:25] Wendy Seltzer leaves the room
[09:45:07] Alex Mayrhofer leaves the room
[09:48:57] sftcd joins the room
[09:51:19] tsuichi joins the room
[09:51:44] coopdanger leaves the room
[09:57:14] mahoney@nostrum.com leaves the room
[09:58:51] coopdanger joins the room
[09:59:05] coopdanger leaves the room
[10:01:56] atle.samuelsen leaves the room
[10:08:57] tsuichi leaves the room
[10:10:02] atle.samuelsen joins the room
[10:14:39] mahoney@nostrum.com joins the room
[10:20:22] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[10:20:23] lllmartini joins the room
[10:28:25] sftcd leaves the room
[10:30:25] Olafur (Note taker #2) joins the room
[10:32:09] mahoney@nostrum.com leaves the room
[10:33:19] mahoney@nostrum.com joins the room
[10:36:16] coopdanger joins the room
[10:40:11] tsuichi joins the room
[10:45:34] Olafur (Note taker #2) leaves the room
[10:46:45] coopdanger leaves the room
[10:53:03] martin.thomson joins the room
[10:55:57] Dan Wing joins the room
[10:58:27] Wendy Seltzer joins the room
[10:59:01] Jonathan Lennox joins the room
[11:00:13] Jonathan Lennox leaves the room
[11:02:31] tsuichi leaves the room
[11:03:17] richard.barnes joins the room
[11:06:16] yone joins the room
[11:06:20] yone leaves the room
[11:06:46] hildjj joins the room
[11:06:51] Dan Wing leaves the room
[11:07:00] hildjj leaves the room
[11:07:06] hildjj joins the room
[11:07:32] hildjj leaves the room
[11:12:08] martin.thomson leaves the room
[11:13:31] martin.thomson joins the room
[11:19:59] richard.barnes leaves the room
[11:23:51] Cullen Jennings joins the room
[11:23:56] Cullen Jennings leaves the room
[11:26:02] dyork joins the room
[11:26:40] danyork joins the room
[11:26:59] mahoney@nostrum.com leaves the room
[11:27:04] mahoney@nostrum.com joins the room
[11:30:14] danyork leaves the room
[11:34:34] richard.barnes joins the room
[11:35:56] mahoney@nostrum.com leaves the room
[11:35:57] mahoney@nostrum.com joins the room
[11:51:15] coopdanger joins the room
[11:51:27] coopdanger leaves the room
[11:58:45] Brian joins the room
[12:09:41] richard.barnes leaves the room
[12:09:41] richard.barnes joins the room
[12:09:41] richard.barnes leaves the room
[12:13:47] martin.thomson leaves the room
[12:21:14] dyork leaves the room
[12:27:26] atle.samuelsen leaves the room
[12:33:39] richard.barnes joins the room
[12:41:50] richard.barnes leaves the room
[12:42:19] Wendy Seltzer leaves the room
[12:52:10] lllmartini leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[12:52:12] lllmartini joins the room
[12:55:45] richard.barnes joins the room
[12:57:34] mahoney@nostrum.com leaves the room
[12:58:31] atle.samuelsen joins the room
[13:02:29] dyork joins the room
[13:07:58] richard.barnes leaves the room
[13:11:40] dyork leaves the room
[13:11:41] dyork joins the room
[13:14:20] dcrocker joins the room
[13:14:37] dcrocker leaves the room
[13:25:15] dyork leaves the room
[13:26:15] Andrew Sullivan joins the room
[13:26:27] Andrew Sullivan leaves the room
[13:29:31] richard.barnes joins the room
[13:32:24] olaf joins the room
[13:32:26] olaf leaves the room
[13:37:37] atle.samuelsen leaves the room
[13:38:14] atle.samuelsen joins the room
[13:45:06] atle.samuelsen leaves the room
[13:45:26] atle.samuelsen joins the room
[14:01:34] atle.samuelsen leaves the room
[14:12:51] dyork joins the room
[14:28:28] richard.barnes leaves the room
[14:30:55] richard.barnes joins the room
[14:42:00] richard.barnes leaves the room
[15:00:32] lllmartini leaves the room
[15:05:12] lllmartini joins the room
[15:06:23] richard.barnes joins the room
[15:26:49] lllmartini leaves the room
[15:30:04] richard.barnes leaves the room
[15:30:31] richard.barnes joins the room
[16:05:11] richard.barnes leaves the room
[16:40:26] Brian leaves the room
[17:18:31] dyork leaves the room
[17:59:24] dyork joins the room
[18:15:00] dyork leaves the room
Powered by ejabberd Powered by Erlang Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!