Re: [salud] Updates to section 6
Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com> Thu, 28 March 2013 19:51 UTC
Return-Path: <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F69421F9001 for <salud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.177
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.800, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_53=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_83=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_84=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SDHS28q3AsdG for <salud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:51:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEF2921F8E8F for <salud@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fo13so18055161lab.24 for <salud@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=X3BeHrdcg7Sw2BdQY9rk20M7gmKkzX4R38Z9xM46Ics=; b=sK4G5xZaZYikgWyO8bo+yfcySHpV9V6cLNMyMXriQqVVxR9cxpfStNw9p4VFVwoVYJ NCJ/Qwho167vpRIcH8CcQmfxKLmFDx3J992VfXe0f7H5RfU83Pc0WvUBojCTQmmKfjhR CrO0V9PVcXvKORiVE/eatxXhiKFKQRXUr3lfxqYijxQ30hFFXnimXx3kGZbkJIf/yLh9 b3Md0qaLYxhn+pTCrWYijuJCD4AIXcA9EGmxJV1w8VYcdMdD6Y2rMzT7BNgM7bPEbjfj R4Ih4ZvSAvhuISVkYd5aSqfMnNFCeZROVcgYWdXQN1dVsGp5qMRmRIMsHP9EAQs9XRsJ RgZQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.123.34 with SMTP id lx2mr13042220lab.52.1364500284654; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.95.99 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201303280039.r2S0deO01302294@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <201303280039.r2S0deO01302294@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:51:24 +0100
Message-ID: <CACWXZj2+Pjyrmqt=j0f429snixnmXBG1Kk+QbCe3G8hxJNG-1Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Laura Liess <laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com>
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d0434bfeac34bb504d9017a80"
Cc: salud@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [salud] Updates to section 6
X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list <salud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/salud>, <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/salud>
List-Post: <mailto:salud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud>, <mailto:salud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:51:28 -0000
Dale, One comment inline. Otherwise I like your changes. Thank you Laura 2013/3/28 Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com> > I suggest the following edits to section 6 to clarify the registration > process and to align the syntax terminology with the new ABNF. The > changes are marked in the left margin with "-" and "+". > > I have a number of questions and comments at the beginning of this > text. > > Comments? > > Dale > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- 07-section-6 2013-03-27 20:09:39.713133697 -0400 > +++ 07-updated-section-6 2013-03-27 20:35:12.872213564 -0400 > @@ -1,224 +1,250 @@ > +[[ Where did this rule come from? > + Each <alert-category> or <alert-indication> label MUST NOT exceed 27 > + characters. > + Can/should we maintain this rule given that we allow punycode labels > + in FQDNs? > + (I have a memory that there is a restriction on host name labels to > + be no longer than 27 characters, but I could not find that stated > + in any RFC.) The very first version of the draft in bliss was intended, as far as I know, to be very similar to RFC 5031. RFC 5031 Section 4.1. contains this restriction. "To allow use within the constraints of S-NAPTR [RFC3958], all top-level service names MUST NOT exceed 27 characters." But the alert URNs don't have anything to do with S_NAPTR, so I think we can remove the restriction. + > +I've removed "and the rules to combine them [i.e., <alert-label>s]" > +from the description at the beginning of section 6.1 because for > +registered URNs, the only rule needed is "use only the combinations > +listed in the registry". > + > +We say "The policy for adding <alert-indication>s may differ for each > +<alert-category> and MUST be defined by the document describing the > +corresponding <alert-category>." But we do not state the policy for > +the standard <alert-category>s. And I do not remember what we decided > +that policy should be. > + > +I've removed the entries like this: > + > + service:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > + extensions > + > +because they are not enabled by the registration process, but rather > +by the extension rules of section 7. > > + > +]] > + > 6. IANA Considerations > > - This section registers a new URN namespace identifier (NID) in > + This section registers a new URN namespace identifier (NID), "alert", > in > accordance with RFC 3406 with the registration template provided in > Section 4. > > 6.1. New alert identifiers > > - Alert URN identifiers are identified by <label>s managed by IANA, > - according to the processes outlined in [RFC5226] in a new registry > - called "Alert URN Labels". Thus, creating a new Alert-Info URN > - identifier requires IANA action. The policy for adding a new alert > - category is 'Standards Action'. (This document defines the alert > - categories 'service', 'source', 'priority', 'duration', 'delay' and > - 'locale'. ) The policy for assigning <label>s to <alert-indication>s > - and the rules to combine them may differ for each <alert-category> > - and MUST be defined by the document describing the corresponding > - alert category. The entries in the registration table have the > - following format: > + Standard "alert" URN identifiers are identified by > + <alert-identifier>s managed by IANA, according to the processes > + outlined in [RFC5226] in a new registry called "Alert URN > + Identifiers". Thus, creating a new standard "alert" URN requires > + IANA action. Each registered <alert-identifier> is composed of an > + <alert-category> followed by an <alert-indication> composed of one > + or more <alert-label>s, as described in Section 4. > + > + The policy for adding a new <alert-category> is 'Standards Action'. > + (This document defines the <alert-category>s 'service', 'source', > + 'priority', 'duration', 'delay' and 'locale'. ) The policy for > + adding <alert-indication>s (sequences of <alert-label>s for use > + with a particular <alert-category>) may differ for each > + <alert-category> and MUST be defined by the document defining the > + corresponding <alert-category>. The entries in the registration > + table have the following format: > > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > - <alert-identifier>; > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > + <alert-identifier> > --------------------------------------------------------------- > foo RFCxyz Description of the 'foo' > - <alert-category>; > + <alert-category> > foo:bar RFCabc Description of the 'foo:bar' > <alert-identifier> > > > Each <alert-category> or <alert-indication> label MUST NOT exceed 27 > characters. > > > > > > Liess, et al. Expires April 5, 2013 [Page 18] > > Internet-Draft Alert-Info URNs October 2012 > > > 6.2. Initial IANA Registration > > 6.2.1. The "service" alert-category and alert-identifiers > > The following table contains the initial IANA registration for the > "service" <alert-category> and <alert-identifier>s. The value of > this indicator is set to a value different from "normal" if the > caller or callee is informed that a specific telephony service has > been initiated. > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > <alert-identifier> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > service RFC XXXX <alert-category> > for "service" > <alert-identifier>s > service:normal RFC XXXX Normal ring /rinback > rendering (default value) > service:call-waiting RFC XXXX Call waiting was > initiated at the other side > of the call > service:forward RFC XXXX Call has been forwarded > service:recall:calback RFC XXXX Recall due to callback > service:recall:hold RFC XXXX Recall due to call hold > service:recall:transfer RFC XXXX Recall due to callback > service:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > extensions > > 6.2.2. The "source" alert-category and alert-identifiers > > The following table contains the initial IANA registration for the > "source" <alert-category> and <alert-identifier>. The value of this > indicator provides information about the user at the other side of > the call. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Liess, et al. Expires April 5, 2013 [Page 19] > > Internet-Draft Alert-Info URNs October 2012 > > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > <alert-identifier> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > source RFC XXXX <alert-category> > for "source" > <alert-identifier>s > source:unclassified RFC XXXX Unclassified ring /rinback > rendering (default value) > source:internal RFC XXXX User at the other side of > the call is internal to the > enterprise or PBX system > source:external RFC XXXX User at the other side of > the call is internal to the > enterprise or PBX system > source:friend RFC XXXX User at the other side of > the call is a friend > source:family RFC XXXX User at the other side of > the call is a family member > - source:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > - extensions > > 6.2.3. The "priority" alert-category and alert-identifiers > > The following table contains the initial IANA registration for the > "priority" <alert-category> and <alert-identifier>s. The value of > this indicator provides information about the priority the alerted > user should give to the call. > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > <alert-identifier> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > priority RFC XXXX <alert-category> for > "priority" <alert-identifier>s > priority:normal RFC XXXX Normal ring /rinback > rendering (default value) > priority:low RFC XXXX Low priority call. > priority:high RFC XXXX High priority call > - priority:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > - extensions > > 6.2.4. The "duration" alert-category and alert-identifiers > > The following table contains the initial IANA registration for the > "duration" <alert-category> and <alert-identifier>s. The value of > this indicator provides information about the duration of the > alerting signals compared to the default alerting signals. > > > > > > Liess, et al. Expires April 5, 2013 [Page 20] > > Internet-Draft Alert-Info URNs October 2012 > > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > <alert-identifier> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > duration RFC XXXX <alert-category> > for "duration" > <alert-identifier>s > duration:normal RFC XXXX Normal ring /rinback > rendering (default value) > duration:short RFC XXXX Shorter than normal > duration:long RFC XXXX Longer than normal > - duration:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > - extensions. > > 6.2.5. The "delay" alert-category and alert-identifiers > > The following table contains the initial IANA registration for the > "delay" <alert-category> and <alert-identifier>s. The value of this > - indicator provides information about the delay of the alerting > - signals. > + indicator provides information about whether the presentation of the > + alerting signal should be delayed compared to the default > + presentation process. > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > <alert-identifier> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > delay RFC XXXX <alert-category> for "delay" > <alert-identifier> > delay:none RFC XXXX Immediate alerting > (default value) > delay:yes RFC XXXX Delayed alerting > - delay:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > - extensions > > 6.2.6. The "locale" alert-category and alert-identifiers > > The following table contains the initial IANA registration for the > "locale" <alert-category> and <alert-identifier>s. The value of this > - indicator provides information about the location of the user at the > - other side of the call. > + indicator provides information suggests that alerting signals > + characteristic of the specified location should be used. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Liess, et al. Expires April 5, 2013 [Page 21] > > Internet-Draft Alert-Info URNs October 2012 > > > - <alert-category>/ Reference Description > + <alert-category> or Reference Description > <alert-identifier> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > locale RFC XXXX <alert-category> > for "locale" <alert-identifier> > locale:default RFC XXXX Alerting not location > specific > (default value) > locale:country:<ISO 3166-1 country code> > RFC XXXX Country-specific alerting > - locale:<private-name> RFC XXXX Reserved for private > - extensions > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > salud mailing list > salud@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud >
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Laura Liess
- [salud] Updates to section 6 Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Laura Liess
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] Updates to section 6 Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [salud] Update 2 to section 6 Dale R. Worley
- Re: [salud] Update 2 to section 6 Paul Kyzivat