Re: [BLISS] more comments on the CC draft

Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com> Thu, 31 March 2011 16:56 UTC

Return-Path: <shida@ntt-at.com>
X-Original-To: bliss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bliss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B24CE3A6A48 for <bliss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.264
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x-ztM35ECM-l for <bliss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gateway15.websitewelcome.com (gateway15.websitewelcome.com [67.18.82.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A0863A6A33 for <bliss@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 15235 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2011 16:57:56 -0000
Received: from gator465.hostgator.com (69.56.174.130) by gateway15.websitewelcome.com with SMTP; 31 Mar 2011 16:57:56 -0000
Received: from dhcp-6799.meeting.ietf.org ([130.129.103.153]:50846) by gator465.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <shida@ntt-at.com>) id 1Q5LBi-0008CH-B7; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:57:39 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-9--986573725
From: Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com>
In-Reply-To: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE21EB8EBD9@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:57:36 +0200
Message-Id: <B89BCD2A-4385-4498-ADC7-841BB918F9B2@ntt-at.com>
References: <9762ACF04FA26B4388476841256BDE020113D8897CC1@HE111543.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE21EB8EBD9@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator465.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ntt-at.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: "bliss@ietf.org" <bliss@ietf.org>, "Martin.Huelsemann@telekom.de" <Martin.Huelsemann@telekom.de>
Subject: Re: [BLISS] more comments on the CC draft
X-BeenThere: bliss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services \(BLISS\) BoF" <bliss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss>, <mailto:bliss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bliss>
List-Post: <mailto:bliss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bliss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss>, <mailto:bliss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:56:02 -0000

Keith;

 Below is the 09 version of the draft that was used to 
create the diff.

 http://bliss-ietf.org/drafts/draft-ietf-bliss-call-completion-09.txt

 Regards
  Shida

On Mar 31, 2011, at 6:32 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:

> Can you provide access to the -09 version somewhere (and please not as the real -09 version as the changes are proposed for WG approval, and should not yet form part of the official WG draft).
>  
> I find the diff link provided less than useful in this form, and there are other things that need to be checked.
>  
> Keith
>  
> From: bliss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:bliss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin.Huelsemann@telekom.de
> Sent: 31 March 2011 16:05
> To: bliss@ietf.org
> Cc: j.dave.smith@siemens-enterprise.com; R.Jesske@telekom.de
> Subject: [BLISS] more comments on the CC draft
>  
> Dear colleagues,
>  
> during the last WGLC I again received a lot of comments from Dave for editorials and spelling corrections, thanks again for checking, my apologies for not having detected them myself.
>  
> Besides the editorials, Dave commented that the procedures are based very much on the assumption of a underlying network architecture where there is a clear seperation between the UA on the user device and the CC agent/monitor which is located in the network. Dave proposed to better consider the case where the CC agent/monitor is colocated with the UA on the user device. 
> An example is a simple UA uses CC via a AS in the network, and when this UA is not available for CC recall, we said that the CC agent SHALL suspend the CC request. But the suspension policy of a more sophisticated agent of a CC App on a device could be different, therefore it was changed to 'SHOULD be suspended'. There are some other changes in this direction. There are no syntax changes.
>  
> Even though they were contributed post WGLC, in my opinion those changes are very useful for a more comprehensive CC solution, and therefore should be considered. I have provisionally provided a 09 version of the internet draft. You can find the changes at  http://bliss-ietf.org/drafts/diff_ccbs.html
>  
> Your opinions?
>  
>  
> Regards, Martin
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> BLISS mailing list
> BLISS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss