Re: [Iptel] Is trunk group a new namespace?

On 1/21/05 6:03 AM, "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@lucent.com> wrote:

>> I'd rather not do that. Instead, I'd rather declare this problem
>> (indicating a trunk group without a phone number) as out of scope. This
>> is not a tel URI issue at all - its an ISUP to SIP mapping issue. Our
>> job is to define a way to extend the tel URI to be able to indicate
>> trunk groups, and nothing more.
> 
> As I have so learnt in the past couple of weeks, the calling number
> is optional in ISUP.  So, I would also agree that mapping an
> absent ISUP parameter to a SIP element is an ISUP to SIP mapping
> issue and outside the scopr of the trunk-group I-D.
> 
> I will consider this issue resolved, and will rev up the draft
> with the WGLC and other discussions shortly.

This sounds like the best path forward to me. I'm happy with this.

Cullen - not as chair.

Actually as chair, after listening to all the options, I really think this
is the only path that has a good chance of closing this issues anytime in
next year to two. Given the WG desire to finish this work, I think this is
the best path forward with my chair hat on too :-)

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
Iptel@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel