Re: [martini] draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on behalf of AOR".

"Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com> Tue, 11 May 2010 08:13 UTC

Return-Path: <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com>
X-Original-To: martini@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: martini@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AC43A6B18 for <martini@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 May 2010 01:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.373
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.490, BAYES_05=-1.11, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227]
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 yW0vHlpyGNuC for <martini@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 May 2010 01:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ms02.m0019.fra.mmp.de.bt.com (m0019.fra.mmp.de.bt.com [62.180.227.30]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B84C3A6B1F for <martini@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 May 2010 01:13:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from senmx11-mx ([62.134.46.9] [62.134.46.9]) by ms02.m0020.fra.mmp.de.bt.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-127145; Tue, 11 May 2010 10:13:04 +0200
Received: from MCHP064A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.63]) by senmx11-mx (Server) with ESMTP id 819C71EB82AE; Tue, 11 May 2010 10:13:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.55]) by MCHP064A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.63]) with mapi; Tue, 11 May 2010 10:13:04 +0200
From: "Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com>
To: Martien Huysmans <martien.huysmans@ericsson.com>, "martini@ietf.org" <martini@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 10:13:03 +0200
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on behalf of AOR".
Thread-Index: AcrtshwWqHqa9So2TYGa8e5DGI//gQAMtdgAAJJtG7AABly/EAAlYPugAADZlfA=
Message-ID: <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CAE352B020@MCHP058A.global-ad.net>
References: <B5CE2B521539624E8364D395B6F76B5C1DCF16D6AC@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CAE34B47CF@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <B5CE2B521539624E8364D395B6F76B5C1DCF16E1CE@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CAE352AC7E@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <B5CE2B521539624E8364D395B6F76B5C1DCF1E5E89@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <B5CE2B521539624E8364D395B6F76B5C1DCF1E5E89@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [martini] draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on behalf of AOR".
X-BeenThere: martini@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of en-mass SIP PBX registration mechanisms <martini.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini>, <mailto:martini-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/martini>
List-Post: <mailto:martini@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:martini-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini>, <mailto:martini-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 08:13:23 -0000

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martien Huysmans [mailto:martien.huysmans@ericsson.com] 
> Sent: 11 May 2010 08:45
> To: Elwell, John; martini@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on 
> behalf of AOR".
> 
> John
> 
> How about:
> 
> The mechanism MUST NOT prevent UAs attached to a SIP-PBX
>    registering AORs with the SIP-PBX based on assigned
>    telephone numbers in order to receive requests targeted at those
>    telephone numbers, without needing to involve the SSP in the
>    registration process.  
[JRE] The point is, I don't think an entity registers an AOR, I think an entity registers a contact for an AOR. So I still prefer the text in my working copy:
"The mechanism MUST NOT prevent UAs attached to a SIP-PBX registering with the SIP-PBX for AORs based on assigned telephone numbers, in order to...".
(In fact I really preferred my original "on behalf of" if changing this to "for" did not help).

Regards,

John

> 
> /Martien 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elwell, John [mailto:john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com] 
> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 3:58 PM
> To: Martien Huysmans; martini@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on 
> behalf of AOR".
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martien Huysmans [mailto:martien.huysmans@ericsson.com]
> > Sent: 10 May 2010 12:44
> > To: Elwell, John; martini@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on behalf of 
> > AOR".
> > 
> > John
> > 
> > The "problem" is trying to understand why the text includes 
> "on behalf 
> > of".
> > This document is input for the other martini document and it should 
> > make sense to me or anybody else.
> > 
> > I looked at RFC3261 on the usage of "on behalf of".
> > Section 10.2: 
> >    Registration on behalf of a particular address-of-record can be 
> > performed
> >    by a suitably authorized third party. 
> > I have the impression that your text is not talking about 
> "3rd party 
> > registration".
> > But I may be wrong.
> > 
> > You asked for a proposition. Here is an attempt.
> > 
> > 1) remove the sentence in section 1.
> >    Rationale: The information feels superluous compared to the 
> >    sentences before this sentence.
> [JRE] I will do this.
> 
> > 
> > 2) Update REQ4 to:
> >    The mechanism MUST allow an UA to register with a SIP-PBX 
> >    without needing to involve the SSP in the registration process,
> >    in order to receive requests targeted at assigned telephone 
> > numbers.
> [JRE] I liked the existing "MUST NOT prevent" formulation, 
> because clearly, even without MARTINI, UAs behind a PBX can 
> register with the PBX, so we just want to make sure the 
> MARTINI mechanism does not prevent this. I think we can 
> change "on behalf of" to "for", if that helps.
> 
> Again, changes are in my working copy - I will wait a day or 
> two before publishing reqs-07.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> >    Rationale:
> >    - it uses MUST instead of "MUST NOT".
> >    - 3rd party registration is a "basic mechanims" 
> according RFC3261. 
> > So
> >      no need to repeat that.
> > 
> > /Martien
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Elwell, John [mailto:john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com]
> > Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 3:02 PM
> > To: Martien Huysmans; martini@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: "on behalf of 
> > AOR".
> > 
> > Each UA that has credentials for a particular AOR can register a 
> > contact URI on behalf of that AOR. What is the problem with 
> that? What 
> > preposition would you prefer?
> > 
> > John
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: martini-bounces@ietf.org
> > > [mailto:martini-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martien Huysmans
> > > Sent: 07 May 2010 07:54
> > > To: martini@ietf.org
> > > Subject: [martini] draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt: req 4: 
> > "on behalf
> > > of AOR".
> > > 
> > > Question on draft-ietf-martini-reqs-06.txt. 
> > >  
> > > The text talks twice about "UAs register with the SIP-PBX
> > on behalf of
> > > the AORs concerned".
> > > What does this mean?
> > > How does an UA register with an SIP-PBX "on behalf of" an AOR?
> > >  
> > > /Martien
> > >  
> > >