Review of Q.3/13 work

1. TTC 20-22 February 2008 Review of Q.3/13 work

2. Q.3/13 results in 01/2008 (Part 1) • TD460(wp2) is the meeting report. • Approved document • Emergency Telecommunications (Y.NGN-ET-TECH) was agreed to put forward to TAP approval process. • Y.NACF-R1 was agreed to AAP. • Corrigendum for FRA Rel 1 • Appendix to Y.2012 regarding server-to-network interface was approved.

3. Q.3/13 results in 01/2008 (Part 2) • FG-IPTV deliverable: IPTV architecture • TD (WP2/13) 0431 is the baseline text for the new Draft Recommendation with a view of consenting this document either in May or September. • Contributors are reminded that they should aim for minimal change to meet this target. They should also bear in mind that enhancements/extension can also be proposed for a subsequent version of this document, so as to avoid delaying the publication of the first version. • FG-IPTV deliverable: IPTV network control aspects • It was considered that the nature of the material in this document was not suitable for its immediate progression as a new draft Recommendation. These opinions were based on the fact that: • a) some of the material was a duplication of the Requirements document; • b) many of the requirements were too high level in nature to be useful in determining functional capabilities, functional entities (FEs) or information flows between FEs ; • c) the mapping to the reference points detailed in the IPTV architecture document was missing; • d) the document contained tutorial and/or deployment guidance material, rather than detailed requirements for functionality. • It was agreed that the document contained much useful information, some of which should go elsewhere (Q3/13 for example), some of which might suitable for use in an appendix, and that the detailed functional requirements needed to be extracted and enhanced relative to the IPTV architecture document to form the basis of a draft Recommendation.

4. Q.3/13 results in 01/2008 (Part 3) • FG-IPTV deliverable: IPTV multicast frameworks • A brief presentation of this was given. It was noted that some of the material was informational, and some related to general requirements (Y.ngn-mcastsf). On the other hand it contained a lot of material that would be useful for incorporation into Y.ngn-mcastfa. • It was considered that the nature of the material in this document was not suitable for its immediate progression as a new draft Recommendation. These opinions were based on the fact that: • a) some of the material was a duplication of the Requirements document; • b) many of the requirements were too high level in nature to be useful in determining functional capabilities, functional entities (FEs) or information flows between FEs ; • c) the mapping to the reference points detailed in the IPTV architecture document was missing; • d) the document contained tutorial and/or deployment guidance material, rather than detailed requirements for functionality. • e) the reason for dealing with non-NGN was not understood since much the material seemed applicable to some extent. • It was agreed that the document contained much useful information, some of which should go elsewhere (Q2/13 for example), some of which might suitable for use in an appendix, and that the detailed functional requirements needed to be extracted and enhanced relative to the IPTV architecture document to form the basis of a draft Recommendation. • It was agreed that members should input contributions to the next meeting to split up the document accordingly and merge the appropriate material into Y.ngn-mcastfa. Thus, contributions are invited in how revise SG13 PLEN-0305 to make progress in this direction. In addition, the editor agreed to take this document into consideration in revising Y.mastfa.

5. Q.3/13 results in 01/2008 (Part 4) • Draft new Recommendation Y.MCFArch, “Mobility control functions in the NGN” • It was agreed for the time being to proceed with this document, initially as a vehicle for Q3/13 to gather all the material on mobility, related to enhancement of FRA. This document would be kept in step and alignment with Q.LMF and Q.HCF. • The input document was revised based on input contributions and is contained in TD (WP2/13). It is planned to schedule a joint meeting in May involving Q3,6.13 and Q2,5/19 Rapporteurs. • It is proposed to hold a joint meeting in May involving Q3,6/13 and Q2,5/19 Rapporteurs, to progress this document further, taking account of the functions defined in [ITU-T Y.NGN-FRA R2], [ITU-T Y.NACF R2], and [ITU-T Y.RACF R2] and the interactions between these functions and the functions required specifically for mobility control as defined in [ITU-T Q.MMF], [ITU-T Q.HCF], and [ITU-T Q.LMF].

6. Q.3/13 results in 01/2008 (Part 5) • Other topics • Y.CIP in TD445 (WP 2/13): A framework for requirements and capabilities for the customization of IP service networks by customers • Y.IPsplit in TD447 (WP2/13): Separation of IP into identifier and locator in NGN • Y.idserv-arch in TD444 (WP2/13): Functional requirements and architecture of the NGNfor ID-based applications and services • Y.DSL in TD448 (WP2/13), with a view to consenting Y.DSL at the next meeting: Use of DSL based systems in NGN • T.NACF Rel 2 in TD446 (WP2/13): Network attachment control functions in NGN

7. Proposals • Among candidate drafts for approval at the May meeting, we should identify major ones that have common interests for CJK. • Raise concerns if any and try to resolve them at the next CJK meeting in March/April. • For Y.2012 (Y.FRA) and relevant drafts, the document structure should be agreed first. Refer to Rapporteur’s input. • For drafts with mid-term targets, their scope should be clarified, if some CJK members wish to proceed with them.

8. IMS (Y.2021) PIEA (Y.2031) NACF R E Q U I R E M E N T S Overview (Y.2001) S E R V I C E + GRM (Y.2011) I P T V A R C H I T E C T U R E FRA (Y.2012) + I P T V S E R V I C E R E Q U I R E M E N T S Rel 1 RACF (Y.2111) + IPTV Service Component(s) + + + R E Q U I R E M E N T S S E R V I C E Established Requirement impacts Architectural impacts Rel 2 Non-NGN consistent?