Re: [Sip] Need for RPH in SIP Responses

ken carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk> Tue, 27 November 2007 16:04 UTC

Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix2vX-0002mK-Eh; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:04:47 -0500
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix2vV-0002m8-Nz for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:04:45 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix2vV-0002lz-Dk for sip@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:04:45 -0500
Received: from qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.96]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix2vV-0007NV-2j for sip@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:04:45 -0500
Received: from OMTA10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.28]) by QMTA09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id HrqN1Y0090cZkys0501n00; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:04:44 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.120] ([69.250.217.141]) by OMTA10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Hs4k1Y00833dvnH0300000; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:04:44 +0000
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=j2sJoBdzzCDz_eK3kPAA:9 a=WG0yntsa8VNs3pzxUoIA:7 a=GgrNABb6MPYRS5opdjXOvcPSp_IA:4 a=Mz_smNXqyOQA:10
Message-Id: <B1428F6F-3BD5-49B4-8475-47C31399D531@g11.org.uk>
From: ken carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk>
To: Janet Gunn <jgunn6@csc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Subject: Re: [Sip] Need for RPH in SIP Responses
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:04:44 -0500
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a
Cc: sip@ietf.org
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>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

Janet,

sorry for the tardy comments on the thread.  when I read the draft, a  
couple of other use cases outside of the GETS model came to mind that  
would seem to prompt a need for an R-P header in a SIP response.  In  
the land mobile radio arena, we have bridging architectures/ 
technologies like the ISSI that use SIP as a foundation to bridge  
autonomous subnets of P25 systems.  These tend to be resource  
constrained systems of multi-level precedence, and so having a  
corresponding R-P header in SIP responses would fold in nicely with  
what is being built today and planned for the near future.

outside of that, there are also some efforts to bridge ISSI with Push- 
to-talk over Cellular (PoC) with SIP, though this is quite preliminary  
so I don't know if I'd list this as another use case.  But in any  
event, I think it would be helpful if you could broaden the problem  
statement in your draft so that it is not strictly focused to just  
GETS.  Subsequent to this broader statement, you could then provide a  
more in-depth discussion of the GETS *example*.

also, is it your plan to progress your draft in the SIPPING WG given  
that it deals with a requirement?  I see its on the SIP agenda along  
with James' related draft, which is helpful, but I assume that further  
progress would be shifted to SIPPING.

-ken



_______________________________________________
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