Re: [Sip] -resource-priority-05.txt: Comments and Recommendations (2)

Mpierce1@aol.com Sat, 13 November 2004 00:35 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA15478 for <sip-web-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:35:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CSluD-0000tZ-2V for sip-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:36:41 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CSlqh-0006Dp-Lc; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:33:03 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CSlp8-0005nQ-EV for sip@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:31:26 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA15308 for <sip@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:31:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Mpierce1@aol.com
Received: from imo-m27.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.8]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CSlqa-0000kH-St for sip@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:32:58 -0500
Received: from Mpierce1@aol.com by imo-m27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id d.19d.2bd091f1 (16335); Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:30:47 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <19d.2bd091f1.2ec6afb7@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:30:47 -0500
Subject: Re: [Sip] -resource-priority-05.txt: Comments and Recommendations (2)
To: coreya@nortelnetworks.com, sip@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 6.0 for Windows XP sub 10500
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 92df29fa99cf13e554b84c8374345c17
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0517376043=="
Sender: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 32b73d73e8047ed17386f9799119ce43

In a message dated 11/11/2004 6:12:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
coreya@nortelnetworks.com writes:


> 2. Is it wise or valid to explicitly allow a proxy to "upgrade" or 
> "downgrade" the  n-p values in a message?
> ---- I'm coming at this from the DSN perspective, but wps and/or ets may 
> allow this kind of thing.  While the DSN/DSRN/(Q735) would not, that 
> does not invalidate the concept.
> 


If one understands the "proxy" to be the entity which provides call 
processing logic and which validates the calling party's authority to use the priority 
level which they signaled in the INVITE (see 
draft-pierce-tsvwg-assured-service-arch-01), then it should be valid for that proxy to "downgrade" the signaled 
value to the level allowed for that user before forwarding the INVITE rather 
than blocking the call. This behavior should not be disallowed by the R-P 
header draft for any namespace.

I can't think of any "upgrading" case, but there is not reason for the R-P 
header draft to disallow it.

Mike Pierce
Artel
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip