[Sipping-tispan] Re: Feature enhancements

[Miguel Garcia <[e-mail]>]

I am ok with your proposal. Do we have other opinions?

It must be noted that, althought TISPAN has the mandate to provide a 
compatible service with the existing PSTN service, it is not forbidden 
to enhance the existing PSTN service.

/Miguel

Schmidt, Christian wrote:

> Sylvia Tessa wrote:
> 
> 
>>I'm getting in trouble here : how are we supposed to proceed ? Do this
> 
> kind of enhancements need to be written as requirements or will they
> come up through common sense >while dealing with the solution ?  
> 
>>Personally I would write in the document only the strict TISPAN
> 
> requirements, then, while elaborating a solution, it will get more
> advanced and general purpose, but what >do the other ones here say ?
> 
> 
>>Silvia
> 
> 
> I agree with you, that we should restrict the requirements to TISPAN
> requirements. Nevertheless, I would propose, to include information
> about plausible feature enhancements in the draft. It would make clear,
> that these extensions have been studied, but are definitely not required
> for the basic services. Perhaps you can
> realize this in some kind of Non-Requirements. Example:
> Non-Req-AoC: The cancelation of a CCBS request by the network must not
> be reported to the requestor of the service.
> 
> What do you think about?
> 
> Regards,
> Christian 
> 

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:[phone]
sip:[e-mail]
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland


_______________________________________________
Sipping-tispan mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan