20040421-rtc-forum.ppt

Editor's Notes

• #4: Internet2 is a unique non-profit corporation of more than 200 universities, 60 corporations, and 40 affiliates working to develop a faster, more reliable, more private and secure Internet that enables applications such as really useful videoconferencing, medical training and care, secure access to music and movies, and high schoolers using electron microscopes to investigate unseeable worlds.
• #7: Stas: Why aren’t application “key” too? Without code, nothing will happen. Aren’t developers an important constituency?.
• #15: Ben – obviously feel free to add a phone number, or not as you like. Or, if you prefer, it's okay with me just to lis t email addresses for us both. I like the multi-mode plug for integration of email:, im:, sip:, but it's not required.
• #16: The emphasis in the first paragraph is on global-scoped communcations and private & open-source collaborations. The listing of demonstrations, tutorials andinitiatives is just for example. I don't think we mean to limit our methods to just these three. The second paragraph is a statement of our core value that a common, bearer signaling protocol (analogous to IP at a lower level) is important, especially in the context of integrated communications. It doesn't, however, mean that we wouldn't ever move outside SIP i.e., location.
• #17: PIC is a relatively new working group, still in its first year – July 1st anniversary. FMM'03 was a learning experience. TIP was initial success. SMM'04 we hope to come closer to getting it right. Grateful for excellent private sector and open-source collaboration. Undecided future. The social context (FCC, law enforcement, etc.) of PIC has been clear for a while. Dr. Clark's presentation at TIP and paper make it clear why an Internet2 working group should include a focus on issues beyond the strictly technical. It may be that discussion for a while will be necessary before this study group decides on a specific direction.
• #20: Growing training programs Testing and evaluate MCUs Remote Collaboration Extensive member Interviews completed March ’04 Data Collaboration Survey with ViDe completed April ‘04 Testbeds: WebOffice and IMFirst data c
• #24: If not covered in previous slides - what is SIP SIP: Signalling protocol for creating, modifying, and terminating real-time internet media sessions. SIP (and its extensions) support traditional telephony features as well as instant messaging and presence. SIP.edu provides a foundation for SIP experimentation by making schools traditional PBX, Centrex, or VoIP phones reachable using SIP. Dennis is the project leader. Note that a user’s SIP address is the same as Email address.
• #25: SIP.edu is one of the projects undertaken by the VoIP WG. The goals of the project are increase the number of SIP reachable users. This will encourage further experimentation with SIP and related technologies. SIP.edu leverages already well-know email addresses by mapping them to existing phones using a school’s LDAP directory service. SIP.edu is a simple, low-cost way for schools to get started with SIP. The SIP.edu cookbook is available on the web as an implementation guide. Multiple solutions are available to meet the needs of specific schools. SIP.edu is working with vendors to add SIP.edu functionality to their products and to make package pricing available to Internet2 member institutions.
• #27: Initial proof of concept installations were done at MIT using a Pingtel SIP proxy and at Yale using an iptel.org proxy. Both schools used Cisco gateways to connect calls to existing PBX phones. LDAP integration was demonstrated by Columbia University - allowing for real-time lookup of email address/phone number mapping using the campus directory. Approximately 100,000 users are now SIP-reachable via their email addresses. Additional schools are in the process of implementing SIP.edu.
• #30: Stas: A more thorough breakdown of strengths and weaknesses is in order. For example, one weakness of the Internet is its vulnerability to internal attacks A 2x2 matrix might be good here {PSTN, Internet} x {Strengths, Weaknesses} Guy” Don’t say: “The Internet designed to withstand nuclear war. No network could withstand a nuclear war.” Guy: Did you consider mentioning 9-11-01 as an example here? I did, but deliberately didn’t mention it.
• #35: Slide 1) Nadim El-Khoury from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is the Chair and participation in the working group is very welcome. Please acknolowdge Ken as being the area director.
• #36: Slide 2) Main goal of VidMid-VC is to integrate middleware into video conferencing with the emphasis on authentication, autherization and resource discovery. Next step is how to bring a federated approach to this technology.
• #37: Slide 3) commObject which is an architecture that was developped by VidMid-VC and Vide (Video Development Initiative) became an ITU-T standard known as H.350. H.350 defines a directory services architecture for mulitmedia conferencing for H.323, SIP, H.320 and generic protocols. Directory of Directories for Video Conferencing has been put in place by SURFnet in the Netherlands and an initial demo was done last in March 2004. More details will be coming soon on how to register your H.350 Directories and Enterprise directories to be search. The First ever H.350 Workshop was conducted in Indianapolis in March of 2004. This event was sponsored by Internet2, ITU, Radvision, Tandberg, VCON had more than 60 attendees. It concentrated on how to adopt H.350 and what H.350 can do for you. We are listing the Demos that we have done, to emphasize the fact that Vendors are embracing H.350 and to point out the fact that you can use H.350 to self configure endpoints, and introduce authentication which does not exist as of today.
• #42: Credits: > *Tarun Abhichandani * > (tarun.abhichandani@cgu.edu)* * > *Samir Chatterjee * > *Bengisu Tulu * > *Haiqing Li * > Network Convergence Lab > Claremont Graduate University > Claremont, CA – 91711. > 909-607-4405
• #46: Credits: