IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [martini] #60: Optionality of Service-Route etc.

Brian Lindsay <brian.lindsay@genband.com> Fri, 23 July 2010 13:26 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.lindsay@genband.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 F3C793A685E for <martini@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 ouDCYefXvaYm for <martini@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og121.obsmtp.com (exprod7og121.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28CC3A68AF for <martini@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([63.149.188.88]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob121.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTEmYobH8OUEfgJIOmZ9zFt46QJ4+PpFO@postini.com; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:26:59 PDT
Received: from owa.genband.com ([172.16.21.97]) by mail.genband.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:26:51 -0500
Received: from GBPLMAIL01.genband.com ([fe80::5527:203:6352:79a0]) by GBEX01.genband.com ([fe80::8063:55ef:b7ab:3543%14]) with mapi; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:26:51 -0500
From: Brian Lindsay <brian.lindsay@genband.com>
To: "john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com" <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com>, "martini@ietf.org" <martini@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [martini] #60: Optionality of Service-Route etc.
Thread-Index: AQHLKbqgbM+XT7wPA0aVUZkUDyb9d5K9c1eA
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:26:48 +0000
Message-ID: <F1A0ED6425368141998E077AC43334E4038800@gbplmail01.genband.com>
References: <076.524bbc875a26b8aaf4f993ab6860e933@tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <076.524bbc875a26b8aaf4f993ab6860e933@tools.ietf.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jul 2010 13:26:51.0614 (UTC) FILETIME=[B5DB4FE0:01CB2A6A]
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.4160-6.000.1038-17522.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--11.831700-5.000000-31
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No
Subject: Re: [martini] #60: Optionality of Service-Route etc.
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: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:26:44 -0000

Hi, 

  Similar to my comment on GRUU earlier in the week, I would like to see these remain optional as far as the draft is concerned. 

 I had interpreted the existing intent of Section 7 as describing how the mechanisms work with gin registration (and extending the mechanisms if need be), but not coupling/requiring that a gin registration implementation also implement these mechanisms. If that intent needs to be strengthened in the text that's fine.


Thanks
   Brian

-------------
Brian Lindsay
Sr. Architect, System Architecture
GENBAND
Office: +1.613.763.3459      
www.genband.com


-----Original Message-----
From: martini-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:martini-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of martini issue tracker
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:26 PM
To: john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com
Cc: martini@ietf.org
Subject: [martini] #60: Optionality of Service-Route etc.

#60: Optionality of Service-Route etc.
------------------------------------------------+-----------------------
------------------------------------------------+----
 Reporter:  john.elwell@...                       |       Owner:     
     Type:  defect                              |      Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                               |   Milestone:     
Component:  gin                                 |     Version:     
 Severity:  In WG Last Call                     |    Keywords:     
------------------------------------------------+-----------------------
------------------------------------------------+----
 In section 7:
 "The following sections describe the means by which this mechanism
    interacts with relevant REGISTER-related extensions currently defined
    by the IETF."

 Perhaps there should be clarification as to whether or not this document  requires support of any of these mechanisms. For example, I don't think  there is any intention to mandate support of the Service-Route header  field - section 7.4 just gives information on the impact if the mechanism  is used. Similarly Path is optional, beyond the specific bits mandated  elsewhere. I don't think there is any intention to mandate support for the  registration event package (7.2) or SIP-Outbound (7.3). Concerning support  for public and temporary GRUUs (7.1), I think this is the subject of a  separate discussion. Depending on what is decided for each of these,  either a blanket statement in 7 or individual statements in 7.1/2/3/4  should be added.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/martini/trac/ticket/60>
martini <http://tools.ietf.org/martini/>

_______________________________________________
martini mailing list
martini@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email