Re: [Sipping] draft-york-sipping-p-charge-info-12: ABNF

"Richard Shockey" <richard@shockey.us> Tue, 29 November 2011 19:01 UTC

Return-Path: <richard@shockey.us>
X-Original-To: sipping@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipping@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA561F0C67 for <sipping@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:01:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.007
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.007 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.488, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rIOH7+cpg1HN for <sipping@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:01:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oproxy8-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy8.bluehost.com [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D6DCD21F85B9 for <sipping@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:01:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 12978 invoked by uid 0); 29 Nov 2011 19:01:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by oproxy8.bluehost.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2011 19:01:31 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shockey.us; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:To:From; bh=svXljWrZyj4lV0RcQjblHM5vdXPqkbUzyhKwrBVphEw=; b=bjY1B/dPgyK09IZpztSOlRC63zKEL1gZmWx0MuLCk7vxSptzqOnMF9+KqnLmzfUgOL3Rzd4cDJQxmES8Jqpz44SPxNnq6iiLIqTYENjHNYhatUJy2/v23oFMMGhNKhmy;
Received: from pool-71-178-24-118.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([71.178.24.118] helo=RSHOCKEYPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <richard@shockey.us>) id 1RVSvq-0000Ir-T3; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:01:31 -0700
From: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
To: 'Brett Tate' <brett@broadsoft.com>, dyork@lodestar2.com, tasveren@sonusnet.com, sipping@ietf.org
References: <7FF1E5E16911C54BB2D57D4C4A2ED35A0C1267A0F5@EXMBXCLUS01.citservers.local>
In-Reply-To: <7FF1E5E16911C54BB2D57D4C4A2ED35A0C1267A0F5@EXMBXCLUS01.citservers.local>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:01:28 -0500
Message-ID: <018301ccaec9$4daa2ec0$e8fe8c40$@us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcyuxaQmInuFxOlKSROVpNRyt7YpuAAAsAWA
Content-Language: en-us
X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 71.178.24.118 authed with richard@shockey.us}
Subject: Re: [Sipping] draft-york-sipping-p-charge-info-12: ABNF
X-BeenThere: sipping@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "SIPPING Working Group \(applications of SIP\)" <sipping.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping>
List-Post: <mailto:sipping@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 19:01:33 -0000

Well well isn't this fascinating.

I was just having a conversation with Dan about this today.

This draft now takes on increasing significance as it solves a nasty little
problem of billing in one way SIP traffic (Skype -  Google Voice etal) that
is vexing the FCC and the carriers as they try to deal with what is
legalistically called "phantom traffic".   It's the preference I'm told is
if no calling party number is available use a CIC or OCN code of sorts. In
two way it could state the preference for billing which is either The CPN or
'Charging Number' 

-----Original Message-----
From: sipping-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sipping-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Brett Tate
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 1:35 PM
To: dyork@lodestar2.com; tasveren@sonusnet.com; sipping@ietf.org
Subject: [Sipping] draft-york-sipping-p-charge-info-12: ABNF

Howdy,

Draft-york-sipping-p-charge-info-12 includes the following ABNF without
explicitly indicating if the charge-param is part of user,
telephone-subscriber, or both.  I'm not sure how to interpret the
charge-param statement since userinfo has no parameters (although user and
telephone-subscriber can have them).

Is charge-param part of user, telephone-subscriber, or both?  I recommend
updating section 7 to remove the ambiguity.

Thanks,
Brett


------

Draft-york-sipping-p-charge-info-12:

"The syntax of the P-Charge-Info header is described as follows:

         P-Charge-Info = "P-Charge-Info" HCOLON (name-addr / addr-spec)
                 ; name-addr and addr-spec are specified in RFC 3261
             charge-param = npi-param / noa-param / generic-param
             npi-param = ";npi" EQUAL npi-value
                 ; generic-param is specifed in RFC 3261
             npi-value = gen-value
             noa-param = ";noa" EQUAL noa-value
             noa-value = gen-value

   The SIP URI contained in the name-addr/addr-spec is the billing
   indicator that is passed between the parties.

   charge-param is used as a userinfo parameter in P-Charge-Info."


RFC 3261:

userinfo =  ( user / telephone-subscriber ) [ ":" password ] "@"
user     =  1*( unreserved / escaped / user-unreserved )

RFC 2806:

telephone-subscriber  = global-phone-number / local-phone-number

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www.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