RE: [Sipping-tispan] TIP/TIR service confusion
"Bemmel, Jeroen van (Jeroen)" <jbemmel@lucent.com> Tue, 06 September 2005 12:28 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32)
id 1ECcYu-00078e-1Q; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 08:28:28 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ECcYt-00078Z-8a
for sipping-tispan@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 08:28:27 -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 IAA24574
for <sipping-tispan@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Sep 2005 08:28:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ihemail2.lucent.com ([192.11.222.163])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ECcbr-0003gX-CH
for sipping-tispan@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 08:31:31 -0400
Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com
[135.85.76.62])
by ihemail2.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j86CSF6N017357;
Tue, 6 Sep 2005 07:28:16 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2657.72) id <QJWZR87P>; Tue, 6 Sep 2005 14:28:15 +0200
Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B1550577DF11@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
From: "Bemmel, Jeroen van (Jeroen)" <jbemmel@lucent.com>
To: "'Miguel Garcia'" <Miguel.An.Garcia@nokia.com>
Subject: RE: [Sipping-tispan] TIP/TIR service confusion
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 14:28:14 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b22590c27682ace61775ee7b453b40d3
Cc: "'sipping-tispan@ietf.org'" <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
Miguel, Given your example with the Nokia switchboard, in my mind the SIP equivalent of the "direct number" in the PSTN is the Contact address in the 1xx/2xx response to INVITE. So I would expect a service that prevents the caller from receiving this information to remove the Contact from responses. Since the SIP specs don't allow a proxy to do that, the service would be considered a B2BUA, e.g. replacing the Contact for the endpoint with a Contact of its own and forwarding all requests received there to the real callee endpoint. The above would be my expectation of a "TIR" service, and I think it would work for IMS as well. As I see it, standard SIP already performs "TIP" since the caller receives a Contact address (which should be a GRUU), and which it is allowed to store and use for future communications. I know that the P-Asserted-Identity header is being considered for this service, but I don't understand why this is needed considering that SIP already performs TIP (as argued above) I agree with you that the current text of the draft calls for a general identity, not a contact address. What I'm saying is that to me this does not match the intended service, IMO it constitutes a different kind of service Best regards, Jeroen > -----Original Message----- > From: Miguel Garcia [mailto:Miguel.An.Garcia@nokia.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 1:50 PM > To: Bemmel, Jeroen van (Jeroen) > Cc: 'sipping-tispan@ietf.org'.org'; Jesske, R > Subject: Re: [Sipping-tispan] TIP/TIR service confusion > > > Jeroen: > > I think this deserves a bit more of discussion. See inline > comments. I > am copying Roland, since I have discussed this service with > him quite a > few times and he seems to have a better idea of it. > > > > Bemmel, Jeroen van (Jeroen) wrote: > > > All, > > > > I am confused by the description of the TIP/TIR service > > > (http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sippi > ng-tispan-requirements-02c.html#TIP section > > 3.3) > > > > As I understand it, "Terminating Identification > Presentation" allows you > > - as a callee - to give the caller a direct contact to > reach the device > > you're using to communicate with them at that moment, which may be > > different from the address (phonenumber in PSTN terms) > which the caller > > originally used to reach you there. > > Yes, BUT: the callee can't give a Contact address straight forward, > because any SIP request sent to that contact address will bypass the > various CSCFs in IMS, and in a few cases, will not reach the callee. > > The calle can use a GRUU though... it will work (whenever IMS > supports > it, I've heard they are working on it). > > > > > A first confusion arises from the distinction between > "identity" and > > "address", it seems to me that the identification shared > here is a kind > > of line identification, an address (SIP URI) that leads to > a specific > > UAC. So not an address-of-record but a contact address as a > UAC would > > e.g. use for registration, in a Contact header. > > I disagree here. I think the identity is a real SIP URI that is not > connected to any Contact address. At least, this is what it has been > explained to me. > > > > > Specific questions regarding the text in the requirements draft: > > "These services support the presentation or restriction of > a callee's > > identity to the caller" - isn't the callee's current > contact address > > meant here? > > As indicated above, I don't think so. > > > "the callee merely indicates an additional identity where he is > > reachable" - could it be any "identity"? I would expect the contact > > address of the UAC being used for the call > > This seems to be more of the same... so disagree. > > > > The example provided, which talks about "the real addressable URI", > > seems to confirm this. In particular, it is different from a > > P-Asserted-Identity value (RFC3325) which contains a > "public address" > > (AOR) for the user > > Think for example when you call the switchboard of Nokia in Helsinki, > and you ask the call to be transferred to me. In principle > you won't be > receiving my identity. But if I activate TIP, then I can send you my > "direct number". I guess this is the spirit of the service. > > BR, > > Miguel > > > > Regards, > > > > Jeroen > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sipping-tispan mailing list > > Sipping-tispan@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan > > -- > Miguel A. Garcia tel:+358-50-4804586 > sip:miguel.an.garcia@openlaboratory.net > Nokia Research Center Helsinki, Finland > _______________________________________________ Sipping-tispan mailing list Sipping-tispan@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan
- [Sipping-tispan] TIP/TIR service confusion Bemmel, Jeroen van (Jeroen)
- Re: [Sipping-tispan] TIP/TIR service confusion Miguel Garcia
- RE: [Sipping-tispan] TIP/TIR service confusion Bemmel, Jeroen van (Jeroen)