Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method v1

"Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com> Tue, 14 June 2011 18:25 UTC

Return-Path: <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.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 22B8211E8173 for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 XRgCnFENQleT for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:25:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail174.messagelabs.com (mail174.messagelabs.com [85.158.138.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 894BB11E8161 for <splices@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-7.tower-174.messagelabs.com!1308075942!23126004!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.17; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [62.134.46.10]
Received: (qmail 9776 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2011 18:25:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO senmx12-mx) (62.134.46.10) by server-7.tower-174.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 14 Jun 2011 18:25:42 -0000
Received: from MCHP063A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.61]) by senmx12-mx (Server) with ESMTP id 6BEA223F03E6; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:25:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.57]) by MCHP063A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.61]) with mapi; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:25:42 +0200
From: "Hutton, Andrew" <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>
To: Alan Johnston <alan.b.johnston@gmail.com>, "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:25:41 +0200
Thread-Topic: [splices] SIP INVOKE method v1
Thread-Index: AcwquuIIfJIWYY42QEKXIUwHId5ynQAA4lkw
Message-ID: <101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E30C229785FF@MCHP058A.global-ad.net>
References: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CD81384C@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <4DF27461.8060204@cisco.com> <101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E30C22977E6A@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CDA812C4@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <101C6067BEC68246B0C3F6843BCCC1E30C229785C2@MCHP058A.global-ad.net> <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B222907E9D3@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <BANLkTimdTmoZ7fDz7wOVBPCPS0WxrRfJoQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimdTmoZ7fDz7wOVBPCPS0WxrRfJoQ@mail.gmail.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="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "splices@ietf.org" <splices@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method v1
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: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:25:47 -0000

Hi Alan,

Might be nice to keep it to a small set but I an not convinced it is possible and most actions will need parameters when you consider different media types, audio devices etc. and even simple actions like call terminate will almost certainly need a reason code.

Regards
Andy


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Johnston [mailto:alan.b.johnston@gmail.com]
> Sent: 14 June 2011 18:46
> To: Worley, Dale R (Dale)
> Cc: Hutton, Andrew; Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat); Paul Kyzivat;
> splices@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method v1
> 
> Andy,
> 
> I agree with Dale that the set of actions should be small, otherwise,
> we are doing something else.  Also, the set of parameters needs to be
> small.  In fact, I think most actions won't have any parameters at
> all.  This is why we are using URNs, just names, for the actions.
> 
> To do otherwise is to introduce complex actions or scripts, and I
> don't want this mechanism to be used for that.  There are other
> mechanisms (e.g. CPL) that allows a script to be uploaded or
> downloaded to control a UA or proxy operation, but that is very
> different from what we are talking about here.
> 
> I agree that we could discuss BNF vs XML, but if we agree that we
> really are dealing with URNs, then a header makes more sense than a
> body.
> 
> - Alan -
> 
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Worley, Dale R (Dale)
> <dworley@avaya.com>; wrote:
> >> From: Hutton, Andrew [andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com]
> >>
> >> The list of potential actions and associated parameters is huge and
> >> for this kind of problem I believe that an XML body would be a much
> >> better solution. I guess I much prefer XML to BNF.
> >
> > I'd feel much more comfortable if we settled on either:
> >
> > 1) a small number of actions
> >
> > 2) to use an appropriate subset of an existing CTI standard
> >
> > In the latter case, could someone provide a pointer to the standard?
> >
> > Essentially, INVOKE is to provide an interface to a command set, and
> > we need to have some idea what the outer limits of the command set
> > will be.  Only then can we choose a good way to represent the
> commands
> > within a SIP request.
> >
> > Dale
> > _______________________________________________
> > splices mailing list
> > splices@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/splices
> >