Re: [Sip] Need for RPH in SIP Responses

Ken,

Could you expand on these other use cases, and how they would benefit from 
RPH in responses?

Thanks

Janet

ken carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk> wrote on 11/27/2007 11:04:44 AM:

> 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
> 