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