RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP
"Henry Sinnreich" <hsinnrei@adobe.com> Fri, 16 February 2007 02:05 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHsTG-0007RO-S0; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 21:05:10 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHsTE-0007Mq-MM for sipping@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 21:05:08 -0500
Received: from exprod6og50.obsmtp.com ([64.18.1.181]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHsTC-0007Jt-Q5 for sipping@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 21:05:08 -0500
Received: from source ([192.150.11.134]) by exprod6ob50.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:04:38 PST
Received: from inner-relay-3.eur.adobe.com (inner-relay-3.adobe.com [192.150.20.198] (may be forged)) by outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l1G24W2s001370; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:04:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fe2.corp.adobe.com (fe2.corp.adobe.com [10.8.192.72]) by inner-relay-3.eur.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l1G24XmC005570; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from namail5.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.192.88]) by fe2.corp.adobe.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:04:34 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:03:34 -0800
Message-ID: <24CCCC428EFEA2469BF046DB3C7A8D2249F0AA@namail5.corp.adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: <61968779B8AC4C4BAB421D4C12F008C00915140A@XCH47YKF.rim.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP
Thread-Index: AcdK2+Kqf8XxF4RlRBKez3RRQPczsAAAHOqwAZlFC4AACrTVoA==
References: <61968779B8AC4C4BAB421D4C12F008C00915140A@XCH47YKF.rim.net>
From: Henry Sinnreich <hsinnrei@adobe.com>
To: Andrew Allen <aallen@rim.com>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com>, "Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)" <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2007 02:04:34.0879 (UTC) FILETIME=[CE1084F0:01C7516E]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4c358d334afcd91b425d436ca5722f22
Cc: ravishankar.shiroor@wipro.com, sipping@ietf.org, Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com, mary.barnes@nortel.com
X-BeenThere: sipping@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "SIPPING Working Group \(applications of SIP\)" <sipping.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sipping@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sipping-bounces@ietf.org
Andrew, It is interesting to note that there is similar thinking going on in other WGs, see for example: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fairhurst-dccp-serv-codes-02.t xt and http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-andreasen-sipping-rfc3603bis-0 2.txt Along with your correct observation: > with an increasing number of competing service providers in the market One has to wonder about the scalability and complexity all levels of defining so many services for so many providers, not only for SIP but also in the transport area. Coming back to scalability, even plain services could have promotions, coupons "free video for frequent flyers", etc. that interestingly enough may not be a good idea to trumpet to the competition or get the agreement first from the competition. Perish the thought... It is also correct that > this argument will be settled by market competition and is not really > the role of engineering to settle. Internet engineers may however share the discomfort that service identification facilitates the following on the Internet: - Possible discrimination of unwanted services by the competition, - Restricting the freedom of development for edge devices and apps, - Charging for the two above, to top it off. Thanks again to all for the thoughtful contributions to this discussion. Henry -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Allen [mailto:aallen@rim.com] Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 2:17 PM To: Henry Sinnreich; Paul Kyzivat; Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF) Cc: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com; sipping@ietf.org; mary.barnes@nortel.com; ravishankar.shiroor@wipro.com; Andrew Allen Subject: RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP IN response to Henry: RFC 4485 also states: Session initiation also depends on the ability of the called party to have enough information about the session itself to make a decision on whether to join. That information includes data about the caller, the purpose for the invitation, and parameters of the session itself. For this reason, SIP includes this kind of information. IMHO "the purpose for the invitation" also includes information about what type of service or application this session initiation request is related to and SDP doesn't provide sufficent information to definitively determine this. I think we can all debate the advantages and disadvantages of building intelligence in the network as opposed to distributing it to the endpoints and I feel that I am also generally on the distributed side of that particular argument however SIP allows for both models and many services/applications utilise both intelligence in the endpoint and intelligence in Application Servers in the network. A prime example is Presence where Presence can be provided with SIP using only SIP endpoints however many practical implementations make use of network based Presence Servers and Resource List Servers in order to create a scalable Presence Service and significant IETF work has been done on creating SIP based and other related mechanisms (e.g XCAP) to support Presence using Presence Servers and Resource List Servers. Being purist philosophical about moving all intelligence to the very edge doesn't always result in the most optimal solution as the scalability advantages of having all the intelligence in the endpoints has to be considered along with the scalability disadvantages of having all the signalling transported to the endpoints. In limited and high cost bandwidth access networks like cellular the scalability disadvantages of having all signaling transported to the endpoint can sometimes outweigh the advantages of distributed intelligence. My understanding is that SIP doesn't take any position on the business models used for communication service provision and IETF has been cooperating closely with those who are using SIP for carrier based services. Some people may not think that the carrier centric service model is the way to go in the future but with an increasing number of competing service providers in the market this argument will be settled by market competition and is not really the role of engineering to settle. Also don't think that failing to develop or delaying an IETF based solution will stop 3GPP from developing their own solution. There are already proposals being agreed within 3GPP based on Accept-Contact header and feature tags to implement this in what I believe is a way that potentially breaks interoperability between IMS and other SIP networks. This is because ithis proposalt requires pre knowledge of these service identifiers and their use in all networks for communication without providing a mechanism to obtain them and also through its use of Accept-Contact potentially signiifcantly limits the flexibility use of that header for its intended purpose. However RFC 3427 doesn't require that new feature tags be discussed in SIPPING even when the proposed usage is required for interoperability. So basically we have a choice between working on an open internet friendly solution to service identification or allowing by default a 3GPP specific solution that potentially will create interoperability issues between internet users and about 2 Billion Mobile users and several hundred million fixed carrier device users. Jonthan's proposal addresses these issues. Something else from RFC 4485: Proxies can ignore bodies: In order for proxies to scale well, they must be able to operate with minimal message processing. SIP has been engineered so that proxies can always ignore bodies. Extensions SHOULD NOT require proxies to examine bodies. As already stated I don't believe that SDP always provides sufficent information to definitively determine the application or service that the session initiation request is related to and even when it does this requires that a Proxy examine the body in order to determine whether the request needs to be routed to some intermediate server that performs service logic or make other service based routing decisions. I think it is far preferable to have some kind of service identifier that specifcally identifies the service logic processing needed included in an appropriate place in the request as proposed by Jonathan and make route decisions based on that than to have proxies attempt to do this based on examing SDP or based on the content type. As well as being more efficient in terms of proxy processing this avoids routing failures due to encrypted bodies or unexpected multipart MIME content types or new alternative content types not yet understood by the proxy causing the service routing to fail. So you can count me in the supporting the work on service identification based on Jonathan's draft column. Andrew -----Original Message----- From: Henry Sinnreich [mailto:hsinnrei@adobe.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:34 PM To: Paul Kyzivat; Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF) Cc: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com; sipping@ietf.org; mary.barnes@nortel.com; ravishankar.shiroor@wipro.com Subject: RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP > I still don't get the intent of identifying the application. It seems to > me this is evil - akin to sending an email message and identifying that > the recipient must use Outlook to receive it, not Thunderbird, Eudora, > gmail, or whatever. This goes back to the old discussion about the IN versus the "dumb network" and we know how this has played out. Placing intelligence (AKA services) in the network is just "dumb design" IMHO for all the good reasons, but makes no sense to discuss on this list. SIP was designed as a rendezvous protocol for multimedia communications on the Internet and not to replicate ISDN, etc., as has been so well documented in RFC 4485: "SIP is not meant to be used as a strict Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) signaling replacement. It is not a superset of the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) User Part (ISUP). Although it can support gatewaying of PSTN signaling and can provide many features present in the PSTN, the mere existence of a feature or capability in the PSTN is not a justification for its inclusion in SIP." Which makes me wonder how many folks have read RFC 4485 and taken it to heart or may have chosen to forget it. Thanks, Henry -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:13 AM To: Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF) Cc: mary.barnes@nortel.com; sipping@ietf.org; ravishankar.shiroor@wipro.com; Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com Subject: Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP I still don't get the intent of identifying the application. It seems to me this is evil - akin to sending an email message and identifying that the recipient must use Outlook to receive it, not Thunderbird, Eudora, gmail, or whatever. I also wish somebody could give better examples of a communication service. Chess is too artificial to be believable, and IMO PoC is only a service because of the way the implementation has been done. Conceptually PoC could be nothing but a special floor control protocol accompanying a voice session. In that case none of the Service mechanism would be needed. Paul Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF) wrote: > hi Ravi, > > in IMS a Service is a "type of communication defined by a service > definition that specifies the rules and procedures and allowed media, if > any, for a specific type of communication and that utilises the IMS > enabler. An IMS communication service defines what is possible within a > single SIP session or standalone transaction." > So a Service implies some combination of capabilities and ways to use > those capabilities. > If you want the Service specifies the context for a communication. > > Instead the Application define the specific communication (or if you > want application) that you want run in the specific context. So you > should have several different applications designed to run on a specific > environment or that have different performance or behavior in different > context (running on top of different service). > > Lets go to Jonathan's example of the Chess. > In his example the Chess is a service, for IMS instead is an application > that you can run on top of different service. > For example you can run Chess application on top of PoC service or on > top of the "standard" service. So let say you run Chess on top of PoC > service, then you can use only voice in the way that PoC specifies. > > /sal > > > > > On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 16:39 +0530, ravishankar.shiroor@wipro.com wrote: >> Hello, >> >> IMO, Service Identification is definitely needed and should be taken up >> as a WG as proposed below. >> >> Further, I think Service Identification scope should be as per the >> requirement in Jonathan's draft, as I still do not understand the need >> for having a Communication Service Identifier and another Application >> Identifier as given in the 3gpp-ics-requirements document. >> >> Regards, >> Ravi. >> >> -- >> >> Ravishankar. G. Shiroor >> Wipro Technologies, Bangalore. >> >> ravishankar.shiroor@wipro.com >> -- >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:30 PM >>> To: sipping >>> Cc: Mary Barnes >>> Subject: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP >>> >>> Folks, >>> >>> during the last year, there have been a number of threads on the >>> mailing list discussing service identification in SIP. In >>> particular, the following thread discussed 3GPP requirements on this >>> area: >>> >>> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg10562.html >>> >>> At a later point, those 3GPP requirements were documented in the >>> following (expired by now) Internet Draft, which was presented in a >>> face-to-face IETF meeting. >>> >>> http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-loreto-sipping-3gpp-i >>> cs-requirements-00.txt >>> >>> Lately, the following draft has been submitted to the archives: >>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosenberg-sipping-se >>> rvice-identification-00.txt >>> >>> This draft proposes a solution that intends to meet known >>> requirements in this area. >>> >>> Given the amount of discussions on issues related to service >>> identification we have seen during the last year, we believe this is >>> a fairly important topic for the SIPPING WG to tackle. At some >>> point, we would like to have a milestone with its associated WG item >>> dealing with this issue. >>> >>> Therefore, we would like to encourage people to read this draft and >>> send comments to the list. Additionally, if you believe that this >>> work is (or is not) important, we would like to hear that as well. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Gonzalo >>> SIPPING co-chair >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping >>> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use >>> sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use >>> sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping >> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use >> sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use >> sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP > > > _______________________________________________ > Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping > This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use > sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use > sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP > _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP --------------------------------------------------------------------- This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP
- [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Gonzalo Camarillo
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP ravishankar.shiroor
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henry Sinnreich
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jari.Mutikainen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Drage, Keith (Keith)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP ravishankar.shiroor
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP ravishankar.shiroor
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP ravishankar.shiroor
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP ravishankar.shiroor
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP ravishankar.shiroor
- [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - proxy t… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - pro… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Esteban, Jairo O (Jairo)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Elwell, John
- Device architecture? WAS: RE: [Sipping] Service I… Göran Eriksson AP (KI/EAB)
- RE: Device architecture? WAS: RE: [Sipping] Servi… Henry Sinnreich
- RE: Device architecture? WAS: RE: [Sipping] Servi… Göran Eriksson AP (KI/EAB)
- Re: Device architecture? WAS: RE: [Sipping] Servi… Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jesus Javier Arauz (MI/EEM)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- RE: Device architecture? WAS: RE: [Sipping] Servi… Henry Sinnreich
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henry Sinnreich
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Atle Monrad (GR/ETO)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Juha Heinanen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - pro… Drage, Keith (Keith)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Göran Eriksson AP (KI/EAB)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henning Schulzrinne
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Atle Monrad (GR/ETO)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Brian Stucker
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Henning Schulzrinne
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Michael Hammer (mhammer)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Spencer Dawkins
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Juha Heinanen
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jonathan Rosenberg
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - pro… Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - pro… Drage, Keith (Keith)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Andrew Allen
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dean Willis
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Eric Burger
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Stephen Terrill (MI/EEM)
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Drage, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dean Willis
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Drage, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Adam Roach
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP - Rou… Adam Roach
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP David R Oran
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dean Willis
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jeroen van Bemmel
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dean Willis
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jeroen van Bemmel
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Juha Heinanen
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Jeroen van Bemmel
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dale.Worley
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Dean Willis
- Re: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP Paul Kyzivat
- RE: [Sipping] Service Identification in SIP colin.pons