Re: [sipcore] Dialog state - Scope in draft-ietf-sipcore-reinvite

Hi,

thanks for the feedback I have received on and off list. We seem to have
consensus on reducing the scope of the draft to session state and target
refreshes. That is great because it allows us to hugely simplify the
rules to avoid glare conditions (this is something a few of you have
requested on the list in the past). I have put together a new revision
of the draft, which you can fetch from:

http://users.piuha.net/gonzalo/temp/draft-ietf-sipcore-reinvite-pre05-01.txt

In addition to adjusting the scope of the draft and simplifying the
glare-related rules, I have also added a few clarifications to Section 5
in response to Robert's AD review.

Let me know if you have any comments.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

On 05/07/2010 9:34 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> the re-INVITE draft talks about modifications in the session state,
> dialog state, and the dialog's remote target. While it is relatively
> well understood what we mean by session state and the dialog's remote
> target, we do not really have a good definition for dialog state.
> 
> We have discussed it in the past and what people had in mind were things
> such as called party identity. However, the draft is too vague at this
> point; it should be more precise regarding which piece of "dialog state"
> the rules in the draft apply to.
> 
> My suggestion would be to have the draft talk only about session state
> and the dialog's remote target, and forget about any other dialog state.
> New extensions whose parameters can be modified by re-INVITEs can
> specify their own rules, possibly referring to this draft and using the
> rules defined in it by reference. In this way, the applicability of this
> draft would be much clearer.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gonzalo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sipcore mailing list
> sipcore@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
> 