Re: [sipcore] WG adoption Request

[[e-mail]]

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-khatri-sipcore-call-transfer-fail-response/

One point of concern is that this proposal needs to be useful within SIP
as it is deployed.  Given the discussion I've seen so far, it's not
clear operators (either PSTN or simpler SIP-over-Internet) feel
sufficient need for this functionality to deploy it.

I also have serious questions about the detailed failure codes.  Why,
after all, should "video call" or "real time text call" be causes of
failure?  SIP handles all media types symmetrically and yet the current
text wants to categorize calls according to the media they handle.  This
is especially relevant because a call transfer always in media
renegotiation, and so the active media after the transfer might be
different than the active media before the transfer.

(Thinking more about this, I can imagine the fuss that deaf/real-time
text advocate Iljitsch van Beijnum would kick up:  You can transfer
voice calls but transfers of RTT calls are rejected!  (It's actually
conceivable that being unable to transfer RTT calls would be classified
as a violation of US anti-discrimination law.))

I also object to the current use of "granular" to mean "detailed" or
"fine-grained", but that's less important.

Dale