Re: [dispatch] URI schemes in P-Asserted-Identity

"Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com> Mon, 04 March 2013 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <rifatyu@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A94F721F8D08 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:25:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qRAec3rg9782 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:25:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1027721F8976 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:25:21 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgIFAP0QA1HGmAcF/2dsb2JhbAA8CYJru2cWc4IeAQEBAQMBAQEPKDQLDAQCAQgNBAQBAQEKFAkHJwsUCQgCBAENBQgBGYdtAQuhWJx0jQuDU2EDnBqKO4J3giQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,541,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="345916860"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2013 14:29:11 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-US1EXHC03.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.85.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2013 14:24:36 -0500
Received: from AZ-US1EXMB01.global.avaya.com ([fe80::54fa:ed52:888e:7ca8]) by AZ-US1EXHC03.global.avaya.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 14:25:17 -0500
From: "Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net>
Thread-Topic: [dispatch] URI schemes in P-Asserted-Identity
Thread-Index: AQHOGQr9SIPFU2v3v02dtExy7g61EJiV51LA
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 19:25:16 +0000
Message-ID: <C563F76EA324474CA3722A35154AFDB3139DF21B@AZ-US1EXMB01.global.avaya.com>
References: <51102D21.10503@stpeter.im> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB11340A073@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <CAPvvaaJn4j0+bqK-de8ecou8fRRfDiXyF4d7piDDgyp8BWZsDg@mail.gmail.com> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB11340B040@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <F2998B6B-0D1E-4DFD-8193-450B138DF57E@edvina.net> <5134F00F.9030301@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <5134F00F.9030301@stpeter.im>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.11.85.47]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] URI schemes in P-Asserted-Identity
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 19:25:26 -0000

Peter,

Today, there is no registry for the "purpose" values in the Call-Info header.
Mary and I have an open issue around this in the following draft, as we would like to register a "ccmp" value.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yusef-dispatch-ccmp-indication/?include_text=1

Please, keep us posted on your discussion with IANA on this.

Regards,
 Rifaat


> -----Original Message-----
> From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 2:04 PM
> To: Olle E. Johansson
> Cc: Cullen Jennings (fluffy); dispatch@ietf.org; Emil Ivov
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] URI schemes in P-Asserted-Identity
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 3/4/13 1:51 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
> >
> > 3 mar 2013 kl. 14:12 skrev "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)"
> > <fluffy@cisco.com>:
> >
> >>
> >> If you don't want to do the vcard but just want the xmpp address
> >> directly, I'd probably suggest something like
> >>
> >> Call-Info: <xmpp:aice@example.com> ;purpose=impp
> >>
> >> To just indicate that the URL provided the IM and Presence
> >> service for that user
> >>
> >> RFC 3261 section 20.9 says that the IANA section of 3261 will
> >> define how to add a new purpose but as far as I can tell it does
> >> not. However, the IANA SIP registry for the URI purpose at
> >>
> >> http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters/sip-
> parameters.xml#sip-parameters-13
> >>
> >>
> >>
> is just spec required so I think think you might be able to trivial add
> a "impp" purpose.
> > Shouldn't the purposes in RFC 3261 be added to that registry too?
> 
> Hej Olle,
> 
> Yeah, I went searching for those in the registry yesterday and
> couldn't find them. It sounds like someone needs to register them.
> 
> RFC 3261 says:
> 
>    The Call-Info header field provides additional information about the
>    caller or callee, depending on whether it is found in a request or
>    response.  The purpose of the URI is described by the "purpose"
>    parameter.  The "icon" parameter designates an image suitable as an
>    iconic representation of the caller or callee.  The "info" parameter
>    describes the caller or callee in general, for example, through a
> web
>    page.  The "card" parameter provides a business card, for example,
> in
>    vCard [36] or LDIF [37] formats.  Additional tokens can be
> registered
>    using IANA and the procedures in Section 27.
> 
> Actually, I think "icon", "info", and "card" are values of the
> "purpose" parameter, not parameters in themselves, right?
> 
> I find the Header Field Parameters and Parameter Values registry a bit
> confusing:
> 
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters/sip-parameters.xml#sip-
> parameters-12
> 
> Some of those header fields have predefined values. It's not clear to
> me if those values need to be registered. Section 20.9 of RFC 3261
> says they do, but Section 27 doesn't say how. (When oh when is someone
> going to work on 3261bis? ;-)
> 
> Olle/Emil, how about you and I take this up with IANA folks during
> their office hours in Orlando?
> 
> Peter
> 
> - --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> 
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRNPAPAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pgvwP/jnZrFSx3H82349715qd6jN2
> /rWF+VLF73tEBHX/ssBaBr4Kwu/RJ+oYK6+jNYbpiq9cmUEsSLjOJOY0frygUHej
> rE/uV5CtXwkn453yWX2ocEUHXI5bnrgENXxqPy2YITXETogf+Ybbs00IrvneMzdL
> FVnxYXFYVWKmKIPbgrGxVD4xDH030yQyxzewUDm6TrF/R3LoSlwULYxle4jfgyYm
> 3bVh64DBsQto39MvtY32abHP1WF1Iav76o7GT0aBb3A09Xv+NkmyRk3EpSbUpj0K
> 0zksaLV3bXivBKKjjC3tV9QiDPCD5bYfqQh5UyiJ+PVYOxGFOt191AfH+8oqyowV
> cpMXDWPeewRoUaskuTyXsPgL5TiCoeBzOgDF+SnLHk5Uq78tjyrH5YJOHD2Zd1AS
> LKn0Xqnb2yZdeFqCEoBAZfAo5W64dj5FF+03+98NxJ4IKFHBob6x/NpeSc3EAvit
> iJxzki6l+MpdK2yd6SbvaMPf2UlqOXBpPuDmxM1SlmgJbWFV3BpvoOjGGHGQcz+v
> 3W13GAv4HXp3LtpgCduAUtBmDsMxydPwy+Zsm2bhkr0XChK9VX2HqbktaU2qOHU5
> QOLqLh5RWFcdK4WVkEtqoNvwHVFq53zC25Ujnq/niBUBm7lvHpuO0E029Gu0AtMY
> WnUZHMGNtbAV+KlfHip2
> =7auh
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch