Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-05
Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com> Tue, 20 July 2010 13:03 UTC
Return-Path: <pkyzivat@cisco.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 8BB243A6AFF for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 06:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 EQWRiTw1o7h9 for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 06:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAD53A6BC7 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 06:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAGQ7RUyrRN+K/2dsb2JhbACfb3GlF5srhTIEiFk
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2010 13:03:48 +0000
Received: from [161.44.174.142] (dhcp-161-44-174-142.cisco.com [161.44.174.142]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6KD3mic002416; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:03:48 GMT
Message-ID: <4C459EB4.3070703@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:03:48 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 <ranjit@motorola.com>
References: <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A4EBDBB@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CAE35FC52E@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A554902@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com> <4BF53641.3070105@cisco.com> <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A5549B6@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com> <4BF5563F.8090508@cisco.com> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CAE3649C1B@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <4BF56106.4010806@cisco.com> <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A554ADB@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CAE3649E86@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <AANLkTimSabU4RHRNPSX7Qvb8u9KCPqLim7b3karJVF1X@mail.gmail.com><750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A854E68@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com><4C3F28E2.3000102@nostrum.com> <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A854F03@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com> <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A855531@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com>
In-Reply-To: <750BBC72E178114F9DC4872EBFF29A5B0A855531@ZMY16EXM66.ds.mot.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-05
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: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:03:41 -0000
I've already said my piece more than once. I've nothing new to say. Thanks, Paul Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 wrote: > Hi all > > Any comments?? > > > Regards > Ranjit > > -----Original Message----- > From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:41 PM > To: Adam Roach > Cc: DISPATCH > Subject: Re: [dispatch] > draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-notification-05 > > Hi Adam > > No Adam we have not jumped into Stage 3 without stage 1 analysis. In > Stage 1 spec 22.173 Section 8.2.7.2 Communication Diversion Notification > Enhancements talks of specific enhancements required for the > Communication Diversion Notification and lists the parameters that could > be part of the notification information. It also further talks about the > trigger for initiating communication diversion notification information > messages towards the subscriber. It finally lists all the elements that > can be part of the Communication Diversion Notification Information. > > So the section 8.2.7.2 of 22.173 should qualify to mention "what" we are > trying to accomplish and the spec 24.604 describes the CDIVN service in > detail and also proposes the required XML schema for the CDIVN XML > package. > > So as mentioned in section 8.2.7.1, the problem is a need for a > mechanism for the subscribers to be notified of communication > diversions. So in addition to the regular CFX services, as a service > provider option, the subscribers are also provided with an option to > subscribe to communication diversion notification service that will help > them to receive notifications of their call diversions. > > Thanks > > Regards > Ranjit > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Roach [mailto:adam@nostrum.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 8:58 PM > To: Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 > Cc: Mary Barnes; DISPATCH > Subject: Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version > Notificationfordraft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-barring-notification-00 > > > On 7/15/10 5:36 AM, Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 wrote: >> After further thought, we feel that since the CDIV service is already > standardized in 3GPP specifications 24.604 (Section 4.10.1.1) and hence > there is no need for explicitly stating the requirements of a CDIV > service again in a separate I-D or document. > > The problem is that section 4.10.1.1 of 24.604 isn't a statement of > requirements. It's a high-level sketch of a solution to an unstated set > of requirements. And section 4.10.2 of that same document is > presumptuous enough to even define an XML Schema for use in this > solution. > > In 3GPP language, you've jumped into stage 2 and stage 3 design without > the stage 1 analysis. > > In the past, what has worked well for extensions to IETF protocols is > when 3GPP does the stage 1 work, and then collaborates with the IETF to > define a solution that satisfies both parties. > > I agree with John, Paul, and Mary -- if this work is to proceed, it > really needs to back up to base principles: *what* are you trying to > accomplish, not *how* do you want to accomplish it? The distinction is > that the answer is to "what are you trying to accomplish" is phrased in > terms of use cases ("a user receives real-time information about the > calls he has missed"), not behavior ("the reason for diversion is > delivered in a <diversion-reason-info/> element"). > >> Also regarding any existing mechanisms, we feel there is/are no >> existing mechansim(s) for getting notifications of a particular call >> diversion service for a particular subscriber > > I think you misread John's proposal. He didn't ask for you to consider > other existing solutions -- he asked you to talk about the potential > solution space. Some of the feedback you've already received covers some > of this space (e.g. information is published using HTTP, and users > discover changes using draft-roach-sip-http-subscribe). > >> Now as per 3GPP's directive, we need to formally standardize the event > package in IETF and hence the draft. > > If you want people to help you work on your event package -- as that is > presumably why you're bringing it to DISPATCH -- then you need to bring > us a problem to work on, not a complete solution to publish. > >> So please let us know how we can take this draft forward to a > meaningful conclusion. > > I think you've been told several times already. What I'm inferring from > your asking again is that you don't like the answer. I'm afraid there's > not much that can be done about that. > > /a > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch >
- [dispatch] FW: New Version Notification for draft… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notification for d… Elwell, John
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notification fordr… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Elwell, John
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Elwell, John
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Elwell, John
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Mary Barnes
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] FW: New Version Notificationfordra… Adam Roach
- Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-… Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
- Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-… Elwell, John
- Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [dispatch] draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-… Adam Roach