IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com> Mon, 21 March 2016 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <rmohanr@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: siprec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: siprec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DA3F12D8B4 for <siprec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kTP7EqltYoZY for <siprec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2805012D7A0 for <siprec@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2691; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1458576661; x=1459786261; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=FJfMiaOn+uDTfEKhqYmH419EV8dsA/3Rb/leUym9034=; b=bdN4pIy0TYXRB7xRW5kkqzjgampUWX704wZnSOsV89WsuVUIXhu4ibra dBWaXdHBW3DOixR+u0XEjJewPbRAIuf9G27wBE5flDIrxpz8U3+8kaiZ+ t2PtnARFkndunyh4k7TIRVacS3xoOaMJb8lyUYCG3AUdtU+W7F5WeZlav c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CrBACuHPBW/xbLJq1eDoRrBrgQhA2GDQKBdQEBAQEBAWUnhEEBAQEEgQUEAgEIDgMDAQIBIwsyHQgCBAESiCe/KwEBAQEBAQEBAgEBAQEBAQEBGIpiihIBBJdXAY4DgWWESohYjwUBYoIwejtqiRd+AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,372,1454976000"; d="scan'208";a="634629421"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2016 16:10:59 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-019.cisco.com (xch-rtp-019.cisco.com [64.101.220.159]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2LGAwKQ010739 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:10:59 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com (64.101.220.157) by XCH-RTP-019.cisco.com (64.101.220.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 12:10:57 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) by XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com ([64.101.220.157]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 12:10:57 -0400
From: "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, "siprec@ietf.org" <siprec@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHRg4xAedGzF39iBEOY71ghXhziGw==
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:10:57 +0000
Message-ID: <D3161B0F.55972%rmohanr@cisco.com>
References: <20160302110853.23213.23639.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D2FD2694.5326B%rmohanr@cisco.com> <56D9989F.1010103@cs.tcd.ie> <D303791D.53A11%rmohanr@cisco.com> <D312E982.5567D%rmohanr@cisco.com> <56EEDFF2.4000604@alum.mit.edu> <D3160C24.5591E%rmohanr@cisco.com> <56F01407.5000606@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <56F01407.5000606@alum.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.1.160122
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.65.78.42]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <0DEE727B7F3D3043A3F84E4056EDA90A@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/siprec/tmQG8qpDoqg2tpF-eryEjwsUgQE>
Subject: Re: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: siprec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Recording Working Group Discussion List <siprec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/siprec>, <mailto:siprec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/siprec/>
List-Post: <mailto:siprec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:siprec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/siprec>, <mailto:siprec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:11:06 -0000

Paul,

Please see inline

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Monday, 21 March 2016 at 9:02 PM
To: Cisco Employee <rmohanr@cisco.com>, "siprec@ietf.org" <siprec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on
draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

>On 3/21/16 10:59 AM, Ram Mohan R (rmohanr) wrote:
>> Paul,
>>
>> One comment please see inline
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: siprec <siprec-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Paul Kyzivat
>> <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
>> Date: Sunday, 20 March 2016 at 11:07 PM
>> To: "siprec@ietf.org" <siprec@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on
>> draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
>>
>>> Hi Ram,
>>>
>>> This looks good. I saw a couple of nits while reviewing the changes:
>>>
>>> * Section 6.1.2:
>>>
>>>     CSs and CS-Groups are optional to accommodate persistent recording,
>>>     where there may sometimes be none.  ...
>>>
>>> That statement is correct WRT CS-Groups, but not CSs. CSs have much
>>>more
>>> relevance, and aren't optional for recording. So I would simply omit
>>> "CSs and " from the above.
>>
>> Above statement is for persistent recording case where the RS may be
>>setup
>> between SRC (say endpoint like voip phone) and SRS even before any CS is
>> setup.
>> Once CS is setup, the persistent RS dialog will be used to record the RS
>> rather than setting up another RS. This statement is to indicate the
>>same.
>
>My point was that CSs are not optional in the same way that CSGs are.
>
>They are optional in the sense that you can send a <recording> element
>that has none

That¹s correct. I was trying to convey this information through the above
statement. Perhaps it is not clear.
How about re-wording the sentence to some thing like this:

EXISTING:
CS and CS-Groups are optional to accommodate persistent recording,
     Where there may sometimes be none.A persistent RS is a SIP dialog
   that is setup between SRC to SRS even before any CS is setupŠ.......


NEW:
Zero instances of CS and CS-Group in a recording element is allowed to
accommodate persistent recording scenarios.
A persistent RS is a SIP dialog that is setup between SRC to SRS even
before any CS is setupŠ.......


Does this look better ?

Regards,
Ram

>. But ultimately it is CSs that are the primary thing being
>recorded.
>And of course communication sessions can exist without recordings.
>
>So maybe this just needs a few more words.
>
>But this isn't a big deal. I won't be bothered if you leave it as-is.
>
>	Thanks,
>	Paul
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email