RE: [Sipping-tispan] Re: CCBS/CCNR in Version -02f

"Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens.com> Thu, 29 September 2005 11:11 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EKwJd-00045M-Lt; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 07:11:05 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EKwJc-00045H-4x for sipping-tispan@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 07:11:04 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA03697 for <sipping-tispan@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 07:11:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailgate.siemenscomms.co.uk ([195.171.110.225]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EKwRB-0006li-Ni for sipping-tispan@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 07:18:58 -0400
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.siemenscomms.co.uk by siemenscomms.co.uk (PMDF V6.0-24 #40642) id <0INK00K01S9LJ3@siemenscomms.co.uk> for sipping-tispan@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:08:09 +0100 (BST)
Received: from ntht207e.uksgcs.siemenscomms.co.uk ([137.223.247.82]) by siemenscomms.co.uk (PMDF V6.0-24 #40642) with ESMTP id <0INK00JC1S9L43@siemenscomms.co.uk>; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:08:09 +0100 (BST)
Received: by ntht207e.uksgcs.siemenscomms.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <TTA600BZ>; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:10:36 +0100
Content-return: allowed
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:10:34 +0100
From: "Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens.com>
Subject: RE: [Sipping-tispan] Re: CCBS/CCNR in Version -02f
To: GARCIN Sebastien RD-CORE-ISS <sebastien.garcin@francetelecom.com>, Miguel Garcia <Miguel.An.Garcia@nokia.com>, "Michael Hammer (mhammer)" <mhammer@cisco.com>
Message-id: <50B1CBA96870A34799A506B2313F266706879604@ntht201e.siemenscomms.co.uk>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 825e642946eda55cd9bc654a36dab8c2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Tessa Silvia <Silvia.Tessa@TILAB.COM>, sipping-tispan@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: sipping-tispan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of requirements for SIP introduced by ETSI TISPAN <sipping-tispan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan>, <mailto:sipping-tispan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/sipping-tispan>
List-Post: <mailto:sipping-tispan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipping-tispan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan>, <mailto:sipping-tispan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: sipping-tispan-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sipping-tispan-bounces@ietf.org

Sebastien,

I was not trying to open up an old debate. I was simply continuing the
recent debate about on whose behalf the service provider is acting, and
whether there are two service providers or one. I can see a role for a
service provider acting on behalf of the callee, since it needs to look out
for different UAs registered for the AoR concerned that might be in a
position to satisfy the CCBS/CCNR request. I am not sure I understand what a
service provider acting on behalf of the caller would do. It would be good
to get an answer to my question about whether a CCBS/CCNR request results in
a call from the same UA as that from which the request was made or any UA
registered as contact for the caller's AoR.

John


> -----Original Message-----
> From: GARCIN Sebastien RD-CORE-ISS 
> [mailto:sebastien.garcin@francetelecom.com] 
> Sent: 29 September 2005 09:11
> To: Elwell, John; Miguel Garcia; Michael Hammer (mhammer)
> Cc: Tessa Silvia; sipping-tispan@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Sipping-tispan] Re: CCBS/CCNR in Version -02f
> 
> John,
> 
> You seems to want try and open the endless debate about where 
> the intelligence should be placed in the network or in the 
> terminals. The approach you are proposing is not something 
> that TISPAN will accept so I suggest that we move out of this debate.
> 
> sébastien 
>  
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : sipping-tispan-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:sipping-tispan-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Elwell, John
> Envoyé : jeudi 29 septembre 2005 08:20
> À : Miguel Garcia; Michael Hammer (mhammer)
> Cc : Tessa Silvia; sipping-tispan@ietf.org
> Objet : RE: [Sipping-tispan] Re: CCBS/CCNR in Version -02f
> 
> Miguel,
> 
> In-line,
> 
> John
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Miguel Garcia [mailto:Miguel.An.Garcia@nokia.com]
> > Sent: 28 September 2005 10:31
> > To: Michael Hammer (mhammer)
> > Cc: Tessa Silvia; sipping-tispan@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Sipping-tispan] Re: CCBS/CCNR in Version -02f
> > 
> > Hi Mike:
> > 
> > Inline discussion.
> > 
> > Michael Hammer (mhammer) wrote:
> > 
> > > Miguel,
> > > 
> > > I think there is still a little bit of schizophrenia in the 
> > > requirements.  I assume that a server is acting on behalf
> > of either the
> > > caller or the callee, but not both because each could be 
> served by a 
> > > different host, domain, or organization.  The first
> > requirement seems to
> > > assume that the CCBS is a terminating service of the 
> callee.  Other 
> > > requirements seem to assume that the CCBS is a service of
> > the caller.
> > > Which is it?
> > 
> > Both. It has been demonstrated that CCBS is a service that requires 
> > cooperation of both the originating and terminatine service 
> providers.
> > This cooperation is mostly required to manage queues of both the 
> > caller and callee, and to manage susped/resume states.
> [JRE] It is not clear to me what the involvement of the 
> originating service provider is. Perhaps this comes down to 
> what exactly are the requirements for notifying the caller 
> that a call may now succeed. Is this notification constrained 
> to go to the same UA that requested CCBS/CCNR in the first 
> place, or should it go to any UA currently registered as a 
> contact for the caller's AoR? In my opinion the former is 
> sufficient and indeed probably preferable. If I request 
> CCBS/CCNR from a particular UA I would expect to receive the 
> notification on that same UA and make the new call attempt 
> from there. In the relatively infrequent event that I move to 
> a different UA in the intervening period, I could simply 
> request CCBS/CCNR again from the new UA.
> 
> So on the assumption that CCBS/CCNR involves only a single UA 
> on the caller side, what service does the originating service 
> provider perform? Why can't the UA directly request CCBS/CCNR 
> and communicate with the service provider on the callee side 
> to achieve this? The caller's UA will receive notification 
> when a the call can be made and can present that information 
> to the caller somehow, allowing the caller to choose when to 
> proceed with that call, e.g., whether to interrupt any 
> ongoing communications in order to make that call.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping-tispan mailing list
> Sipping-tispan@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan
> 

_______________________________________________
Sipping-tispan mailing list
Sipping-tispan@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan