RE: [Sip] Vocabulary and problem statement forRequest-URI,retargeting, and SIP routing (long, but read it!)

["Elwell, John" <[e-mail]>]

Hadriel,

Well, I have been having a side thread with Christer and Hans Erik, and
the only difference other than syntax that they could convince me of was
support for UAs that do not register, in that with loose-route you would
need additional provisioning in the domain proxy to say that the UA
(gateway or whatever) supports loose-route. Given that you would need
provisioning in the proxy anyway for such UAs, I didn't see this as a
big deal, but it is a difference.

John 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hadriel Kaplan [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Sent: 18 January 2008 15:15
> To: Elwell, John; Dean Willis; IETF SIP List
> Subject: RE: [Sip] Vocabulary and problem statement 
> forRequest-URI,retargeting, and SIP routing (long, but read it!)
> 
> Hey John,
> Inline...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Elwell, John [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 2:48 AM
> > >
> > > But in the re-targeting scenario such as:
> > >                     RTRG                    RRT
> > >                    +---+                   +---+
> > >                    |R1 |                   |R2 |
> > >                 B /+---+\ C             E /+---+\ F
> > >             RT   /       \  RT      RT   /       \  RT
> > >            +---+/         \+---+ D +---+/         \+---+
> > >            |P1 |           |P2 +---+P3 |           |P4 |
> > >         A /+---+           +---+   +---+           +---+\ G
> > >          /                                               \
> > >    +---+/                                                 \+---+
> > >    |UAC|                                                   |UAS|
> > >    +---+                                                   +---+
> > >
> > > UA-Loose-routing wants the req-uri seen on connection "C" I think.
> > > To header gives you A.
> > > PCPID gives you E.
> > > Hist-Info gives you A,B,C,D,E,F.
> > [JRE] According to Dean's definition of RT, it does not change the
> > Request-URI (only the Route header field presumably, or 
> maybe not even
> > that).
> > So C, D and E are the same. Also A and B are the same, and 
> F and G are
> > the same.
> > So I think:
> > - UA-Loose-routing gives you C/D/E
> > - To gives you A/B
> > - PCPID gives you C/D/E
> > - Target gives you C/D/E
> > - Hist-info gives you A/B, C/D/E and F/G.
> 
> Yes, I agree that is the *theory*.  :)
> I drew it that way though so we could argue about what the 
> UAS/UALR-draft _wants_ to happen vs. what _will_ happen if P2 
> or P3 are not purely RT's and didn't support a new draft. 
> (Since it seemed the conversation was going that way 
> previously on this list, for example when Christer pointed 
> out the difference between Target and PCPID)
> 
> For example, I think there is more than just a syntax 
> difference between Christer's sip-target-uri-delivery draft 
> (STUD?) and Jonathan's UALR approach.  Though I have no idea 
> which one is better.
> 
> -hadriel
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
> Use [e-mail] for new developments on the application of sip
> 


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
Use [e-mail] for new developments on the application of sip