RE: [Sipping] Re: draft-elwell-sipping-service-retargeting-00.txt

"Francois Audet" <audet@nortel.com> Fri, 14 October 2005 22:36 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EQYA7-0003oY-Hi; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:36:27 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EQYA5-0003lS-49 for sipping@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:36:25 -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 SAA00984 for <sipping@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:36:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EQYKr-0000ea-Vn for sipping@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:47:35 -0400
Received: from zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com (zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com [47.103.123.71]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id j9EMa2C13028; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:36:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
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] Re: draft-elwell-sipping-service-retargeting-00.txt
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:35:49 -0500
Message-ID: <1ECE0EB50388174790F9694F77522CCF04C4CD3F@zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com>
Thread-Topic: [Sipping] Re: draft-elwell-sipping-service-retargeting-00.txt
Thread-Index: AcXQ1TcCClzxsMk5RZ634qmMQAnuxgAOLDRg
From: Francois Audet <audet@nortel.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens.com>, sipping <sipping@ietf.org>
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>
Sender: sipping-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sipping-bounces@ietf.org

> Suppose A calls B. But B has forwarding on busy set (to C). 
> So the proxy 
> for B retargets, with the new R-URI being:
> 
> 	sip:c@example.com;
> 	    old-target=sip:b@example.com;
> 	    retargeting-reason=busy
> 
> This then goes to the proxy for C. It again has to retarget, 
> to one of 
> the registered contacts for C. This is a "normal" retargetting. What 
> does the draft expect the new R-URI to be? I can see at least three 
> possibilities:
> 
> 1.	sip:c-phone.example.com
> 
> 2.	sip:c-phone.example.com;
> 	    old-target=sip:b@example.com;
> 	    retargeting-reason=busy
> 
> 3.	sip:c-phone.example.com;
> 	    old-target=sip:c@example.com;
> 	    retargeting-reason=distribution
> 
> This is similar to the examples in the draft involving a deputy, but 
> where the address of the deputy is an AOR that requires 
> further routing. 
> If the human deputy that answers the phone is to get any value out of 
> this, it will be because his phone (sip:c-phone.example.com) 
> tells him 
> the situation. Only (2) above makes that work.
> 
> If that is what is intended, then proxy C must copy the 
> parameters from 
> the R-URI it receives to the new target. This is not standard 
> behavior 
> for a proxy.

Right: I wouldn't expect a proxy to "copy" parameters around. The whole
purpose of this draft is NOT to add new requirements on generic proxy.

Only the entity responsible for retargeting to a new SERVICE can modify
the target.

Personally, I think the best way to do this would be to have the first
retarget to point to:
 
sip:c@c-phone.example.com;old-target=sip:b@example.com;retargeting-reaso
n=busy

So it would avoid the "normal" routing steps afterwards, and the whole
problem
in the first place. I.e., don't use an AOR but a valid resolved contact.

That being said, if one is a masochist, you could decide to parse the
History-Info including the information (which I wouldn't do because it
is subject to be filtered out by "the network").

_______________________________________________
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