Re: [dispatch] Comments on draft-jain-dispatch-session-recording-protocol-req-00

"Jain, Rajnish" <Rajnish.Jain@ipc.com> Thu, 30 July 2009 11:17 UTC

Return-Path: <rajnish.jain@ipc.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01FB23A6C0D for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6]
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 ftlKqvVSQOOs for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:17:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p01c11o145.mxlogic.net (p01c11o145.mxlogic.net [208.65.144.68]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 278BF3A6A0E for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:17:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown [65.244.37.52] (EHLO p01c11o145.mxlogic.net) by p01c11o145.mxlogic.net (mxl_mta-6.3.0-2) with ESMTP id 951817a4.9df3fb90.525280.00-512.985638.p01c11o145.mxlogic.net (envelope-from <rajnish.jain@ipc.com>); Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:17:45 -0600 (MDT)
X-MXL-Hash: 4a7181590c106823-cbac3ab9ec6f3dbce37f4f38a25ad8317d8d07a9
Received: from unknown [65.244.37.52] (EHLO smtp.ipc.com) by p01c11o145.mxlogic.net (mxl_mta-6.3.0-2) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id b31817a4.0.525263.00-004.985600.p01c11o145.mxlogic.net (envelope-from <rajnish.jain@ipc.com>); Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:17:31 -0600 (MDT)
X-MXL-Hash: 4a71814b4609110f-143a14fa8200e18283966f2953c38bb65fab7dc3
Received: from STSNYCMS1.corp.root.ipc.com ([169.254.2.27]) by STSNYHTCAS2.corp.root.ipc.com ([10.201.40.93]) with mapi; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:17:14 -0400
From: "Jain, Rajnish" <Rajnish.Jain@ipc.com>
To: "Doken, Serhad" <sdoken@qualcomm.com>, Leon Portman <Leon.Portman@nice.com>, Alan Johnston <alan@sipstation.com>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:17:14 -0400
Thread-Topic: [dispatch] Comments on draft-jain-dispatch-session-recording-protocol-req-00
Thread-Index: AcoMjLJ6ThzVzaclTwCm7I3jEBcc0QBBkppwAHDEl3AAbBzkIA==
Message-ID: <A549831415082442872141F4C99FE71301D1C5A59E@STSNYCMS1.corp.root.ipc.com>
References: <4A69FD6A.4020205@sipstation.com> <07465C1D981ABC41A344374066AE1A2C37D51541F2@TLVMBX01.nice.com> <ED88AAAE8B3D764B9FD8558DE1775B69139D6658D5@NASANEXMB09.na.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <ED88AAAE8B3D764B9FD8558DE1775B69139D6658D5@NASANEXMB09.na.qualcomm.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-8.0.0.1307-5.600.1016-16794.004
x-tm-as-result: No--37.342400-0.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: Yes
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam: [F=0.2000000000; CM=0.500; S=0.200(2009071501)]
X-MAIL-FROM: <rajnish.jain@ipc.com>
X-SOURCE-IP: [65.244.37.52]
X-AnalysisOut: [v=1.0 c=1 a=D4USGbs0y0J827gn68Ljfg==:17 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a]
X-AnalysisOut: [=7FSLcVdvdOOWYAcfDgoA:9 a=uV57MIB1xYsRArT9OhEA:7 a=hDxoucB]
X-AnalysisOut: [DGljsYGnUpckoli8PvDMA:4]
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Comments on draft-jain-dispatch-session-recording-protocol-req-00
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:17:44 -0000

> > I'm not sure that the Persistent and Dynamic Recording as defined above
> > correspond to the Always On and On Demand modes defined in
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wing-sipping-srtp-key-04#section-4.
> >
> > [LeonP] It is different in the way that the Recording Session is
> > established only once during initialization (or login events) and then
> > only media is forwarded per each call in order to minimize the
> > clipping.
>
> I see the "Always On" Recording as a separate third mode of Recording where
> for a particular one or set of devices(possibly set via provisioning), all
> calls are recorded from start to end(by setting up recording sessions) and
> no persistent recording sessions are kept for them.

I guess this is semantics, but wouldn't that still be "On Demand"? In your scenario, it just so happens that the RC/RS have been configured to record all calls for a given end-point, but the recording sessions are still established on a per call basis.

Thanks,
Raj



DISCLAIMER: This e-mail may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, do not duplicate or redistribute it by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received it in error. Unintended recipients are prohibited from taking action on the basis of information in this e-mail.E-mail messages may contain computer viruses or other defects, may not be accurately replicated on other systems, or may be intercepted, deleted or interfered with without the knowledge of the sender or the intended recipient. If you are not comfortable with the risks associated with e-mail messages, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with IPC. IPC reserves the right, to the extent and under circumstances permitted by applicable law, to retain, monitor and intercept e-mail messages to and from its systems.