[Sipping-tispan] AW: Requirements -02g

"Jesske, R" <R.Jesske@t-com.net> Fri, 30 September 2005 05:36 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ELDZi-0007pu-BY; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:36:50 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ELDZc-0007pL-6o for sipping-tispan@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:36:48 -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 BAA08030 for <sipping-tispan@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:36:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tcmail33.telekom.de ([217.6.95.240]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ELDhP-0003MU-VT for sipping-tispan@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:44:48 -0400
Received: from S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de by tcmail31.dmz.telekom.de with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:36:34 +0200
Received: by S4DE8PSAANQ.blf.telekom.de with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <T43W2YJA>; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:36:34 +0200
Message-Id: <E7666D92C64C2845AEF12636FF94F95202319F9B@S4DE8PSAAGQ.blf.telekom.de>
From: "Jesske, R" <R.Jesske@t-com.net>
To: Miguel.An.Garcia@nokia.com, sipping-tispan@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:36:32 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 6cca30437e2d04f45110f2ff8dc1b1d5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Alexeitsev, D" <D.Alexeitsev@t-com.net>
Subject: [Sipping-tispan] AW: Requirements -02g
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,
with regard to ACR Eric asked also the same question.
Fact is that within ETSI there is no requirement for a ACR bypass for police.
During the discussion we had several weeks ago, I pointed to the CPC that if somebody likes to create a bypass service he could use the cpc. If I'm looking to the ANSI ISUP there are several more CPC values to indicate a where the call comes from.
So if we have a CPC like police it is possible to create an override but we don't need to express this requirement, because it is not longer needed.

I have nothing against to move the CPC requirements to the General once.

Best Regards

Roland

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Miguel Garcia [mailto:Miguel.An.Garcia@nokia.com] 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. September 2005 13:26
> An: 'sipping-tispan@ietf.org'
> Cc: Jesske, Roland; Alexeitsev, Denis
> Betreff: Requirements -02g
> 
> 
> Hi:
> 
> I have this working copy of the requirements, version -02g:
> 
> http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sippin
g-tispan-requirements-02g.txt
http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sipping-tispan-requirements-02g.html

And a diff version with respect -02f:

http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sipping-tispan-requirements-02f-to-g.html

The changes in this version are:
- Grouping of the CCBS/CCNR requirements for better understing
- A few clarifications to the CDIV requirements
- Addition of the Calling Party Category requirements.

Now, I have a few questions.

- The Calling Party Category requirements do not constitute a service by 
  itself. In my opinion, they should be General requirements listed a 
REQ-GEN-4 and REQ-GEN-5. Does anyone oppose to move them to the General 
section?

- We had a pending action point to revisit the ACR requirements once we 
have drafted the Calling Party Category requirements. Now we have 
achieved this state, and my opinion is that we don't need to add any 
extra wording to ACR, since the Calling Party Category requirements 
cover the use case we have been discussing (police anonymously call a 
user with ACR activated).

Last, but not least, WE ARE ALMOST DONE with the requirements. So please 
take a look at this draft and comment on any pending issue. I would like 
to solve issues as soon as possible and submit the draft for publication.

Regards,

         Miguel

-- 
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