1. SIMPLE WG IETF-68 Meeting Centralized Conferencing (XCON) using the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) draft-boulton-xcon-msrp-conferencing-04 Editors: Chris Boulton (cboulton@ubiquitysoftware.com) Mary Barnes (mary.barnes@nortel.com)

2. Contents Background Overview Scope Relation to draft-niemi-simple-chat Issues/Discussion Way Forward

3. Background Topic discussed in the past in the XCON WG: –02 presented at IETF-64 as a ‘Work-In-Progress’ –Introduced the concept of an XCON Conference Object with MSRP as the media type –Discussed on Tuesday, March 20 th – charts in the archives (RAI – XCON – MSRP Conferencing) https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/meeting_mat erials.cgi?meeting_num=68

4. Overview XCON Conference Framework almost complete as an XCON WG item –Understandably discussions have primarily focused on voice/video conferences Framework introduces generic topics applicable to multiple signalling protocols and media types –Conference Object –Cloning Tree Model MSRP as an alternative media type provides a valid proof point for the XCON Framework

6. Overview MSRP connection to Conference System is used to send messages to a Conference Instance

7. Overview MSRP SEND message is then distributed to relevant participants of the Conference Instance

8. Scope Document in ‘no-way’ impacts the core MSRP protocol –Simply applies XCON Framework principles Document complements draft-niemi-simple-chat-06 by focusing on the framework aspects rather than the MRSP specific details. Nicknames aren’t addressed as they’re deemed a more general problem.

9. Differences between boulton-xcon-msrp-conferencing versus draft-niemi-simple-chat Functionboulton-xcon-msrp- conferencing niemi-simple-chat Distributor of messages MSRP Conferencing System MSRP Switch SignalingCCP or any Call Signaling protocol, CCP SIP Impact on MSRP NoYes (for Nicknames) NicknamesNoYes Private messagingYes SidebarsYesNo

10. Issues/discussion Should a more general Nickname mechanism be developed ? Or, is a MSRP specific solution (and thus later other solutions such as for XCON) a better path?

11. Way Forward Plans are to update document based on feedback: –Editorial nits –Clarification around scope per issues discussion in XCON on March 20 th : Put forth as a more general text based solution, with MSRP used as an example. Put in more text on fundamental chat functionality (implied by requirements which are met). This document doesn’t contradict niemi-simple-chat, but complements, thus both docs can be progressed in parallel