1. DISPATCH WG: ad hoc meeting on DREGS IETF-76 Mary Barnes (Dispatch WG co-chair) Eric Burger (ad hoc chair) 12 November 20091 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan

2. Remote Logistics mp3 Feed: SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE!!! – http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf763.m3u http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf763.m3u Jabber – Server: jabber.ietf.org – Room: dispatch – URI: xmpp:dispatch@jabber.ietf.org?join – Logs: http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/dispatch/http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/dispatch/ – Meeting Materials https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/76/materials.html#wg- dispatch https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/76/materials.html#wg- dispatch 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 2

3. Scribes and Transcribes Jabber Scribe Note Takers 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 3

4. Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity is considered an "IETF Contribution". Such statements include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to: – the IETF plenary session, – any IETF working group or portion thereof, – the IESG or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG, – the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB, – any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices, – the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 (updated by RFC 4879). Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the context of this notice. Please consult RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 for details.RFC 5378RFC 3979RFC 4879RFC 5378RFC 3979 A participant in any IETF activity is deemed to accept all IETF rules of process, as documented in Best Current Practices RFCs and IESG Statements. A participant in any IETF activity acknowledges that written, audio and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the public. 12 November 20094 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan

5. Agenda 11:45-11:50Agenda bash (chairs) 11:50-12:30Status and Charter Discussion (John Elwell and Spencer Dawkins) 12:30-12:40Standard WG Hums (chairs) We will end on time – CODEC BOF is at 1pm – CODEC BOF Chairs, whom I know personally, will be very unhappy if we run late 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 5

6. CHARTER DISCUSSION Spencer Dawkins, John Elwell

7. Background draft-kaplan-dispatch-domain-registration-01 Some mailing list discussion on 00 DISPATCH Chairs decided that we would need a mini-WG on this

8. What is DREGS? The Domain REGistration for SIP (DREGS) working group is chartered to specify a means by which an entity authoritative for SIP URIs in a given domain can dynamically register reachability information for that domain with another domain. 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 8

9. Charter Scope Provide reachability information for small/medium SIP-PBXs that have dynamic IP addresses without using dynamic DNS Use of REGISTER to minimize implementation effort to upgrade what is out there today A header field for requesting domain registration A SIP option tag to detect non-support of this mechanism

10. Deliverables The group will produce: – Domain registration specification Timeline: – Jan 2010Domain registration specification to WGLC – Feb 2010Domain registration specification to IESG (PS) Full charter text available at: http://www.ietf.org/mail- archive/web/dispatch/current/msg00877.html http://www.ietf.org/mail- archive/web/dispatch/current/msg00877.html 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 10

11. WG FORMATION Chairs 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 11

12. RFC 5434 Questions Is scope well defined and understood?Is specific deliverable right thing to deliver?Is there critical mass in IETF to work on problem?Is the IETF the right place to work on problem?Will WG have high probability of success? 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 12

13. Thanks! 12 November 2009 DREGS ad hoc (DISPATCH) IETF 76, Hiroshima, Japan 13