Re: [splices] INVOKE Actions Scope

"Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com> Mon, 18 July 2011 01:17 UTC

Return-Path: <dworley@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: splices@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: splices@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A0D21F8804 for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:17:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.342
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.342 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.257, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hEUgotTVtO-Y for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71FE821F87FA for <splices@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EADeII06HCzI1/2dsb2JhbABSp3J3sDkCmjKFXV8EmASLUw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,219,1309752000"; d="scan'208";a="291240787"
Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2011 21:17:11 -0400
Received: from dc-us1hcex2.us1.avaya.com (HELO DC-US1HCEX2.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.21]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2011 21:10:00 -0400
Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([169.254.2.172]) by DC-US1HCEX2.global.avaya.com ([::1]) with mapi; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 21:17:11 -0400
From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com>
To: "Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, "splices@ietf.org" <splices@ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 21:12:40 -0400
Thread-Topic: [splices] INVOKE Actions Scope
Thread-Index: Acww/2lIInU16D1MQoqzcynyzVKFbgQbxviAAGhnjjcAZ0TGcAAOpRfs
Message-ID: <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B222B1F5784@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
References: <4CA2C4386DB56F4589D436E1C3C86F752230509C3B@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <AD0C7C55-811C-4932-AAAE-4F8780D30BE4@cisco.com>, <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CF6DED91@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B222B1F5779@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>, <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CF878BAB@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CF878BAB@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [splices] INVOKE Actions Scope
X-BeenThere: splices@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Loosely-coupled SIP Devices \(splices\) working group discussion list" <splices.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/splices>, <mailto:splices-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/splices>
List-Post: <mailto:splices@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:splices-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/splices>, <mailto:splices-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 01:17:13 -0000

________________________________________
From: Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)

"A response of this type [6xx] not only rejects the call but also
   requires the termination of all attempts to route the call to
   alternative destinations "

If a telemarketer is calling me and I want to decline his call, then this is exactly what I want.
Why do you think that this is a bad thing to do?
________________________________________

If a telemarketer is calling, what you *really* want is response "1313 Make Caller's Head Explode".

But in the case where what you want to communicate is that *you* don't want
to handle the call.  As there may be forks upstream of your UA and your PBX,
all you can know is that there are no destinations *within your PBX* that should not
take the call.  It is impossible for you to know that there are *no* appropriate destinations
anywhere upstream, as you don't know what all the upstream forks are (absent History-Info).

In practice, the situation is even worse, as many phones have a "Decline Call" button that sends
a 603 response.  But if voicemail is implemented by the sensible means of having the VM system
be a lower-priority fork, the 603 prevents the call from going to voicemail.

Dale