Re: [dispatch] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-kyzivat-dispatch-trs-call-info-purpose-00.txt

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

On 1/22/15 10:44 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]> writes:
>> I have just submitted a new draft (see below) that needs to be
>> dispatched. It defines a new Call-Info 'purpose' parameter value.
>>
>> The intended audience for this draft is quite limited - to the providers
>> of the Video Relay Service in the US, and to the FCC that sponsors that
>> service. The Intro section explains this.
>
> The use of "original IP address" as the means to identify the caller
> seems rather odd to me.  But I assume that this is what the FCC
> specifies, and they have good reason to do this.  Given that:

It is what it is, whether it makes sense or not.

> Should the 'purpose' value be "original-ip-address"?


> Should the draft specify that the URI must have the syntax "sip:" +
> IPv4address?  It doesn't specify that now, although the usage has that
> restriction.  What about IPv6 addresses?  Or should we leave no
> restrictions on the URI to allow future improvements, and just note that
> the current practice is to use a very limited syntax?

I was trying to make the mechanism at least a little less special 
purpose. In practice, when used for TRS, it will contain an IP address. 
But the mechanism doesn't need to be that specialized.

Currently an IPv6 would be acceptable. And an h323 address might also 
make sense. (I included use cases for that.) And in some other context 
(without the FCC requirement) maybe a non-ip address would be ok.

	Thanks,
	Paul