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

John,

Basically it enables "service interactions", "charging model", "control of subscriber rights to the service", "playing CCBS related announcement"...Having the service logic embedded in an Application Server serving the originating user makes all this possible. 

If you want a more detailed to understand the role of the service provider acting of behalf of the caller, I suggest you read the related section dealing with the originating exchange in ITU-T Q.733 or contact your Siemens collegues that participate to TISPAN.

Regards,
sébastien

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Elwell, John [mailto:john.elwell@siemens.com] 
Envoyé : jeudi 29 septembre 2005 13:11
À : GARCIN Sebastien RD-CORE-ISS; Miguel Garcia; Michael Hammer (mhammer)
Cc : Tessa Silvia; sipping-tispan@ietf.org
Objet : RE: [Sipping-tispan] Re: CCBS/CCNR in Version -02f

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