Re: [splices] Fwd: Progressing the INVOKE-related work

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Tue, 26 July 2011 01:52 UTC

Return-Path: <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.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 1A3E811E80DF for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.605
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.605 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.006, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 Vq793TirDQxc for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (mailgw9.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E5311E807D for <splices@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb39-b7bfdae000005125-41-4e2e1ddbc3c6
Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 32.70.20773.BDD1E2E4; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 03:52:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [131.160.126.141] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.137.0; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 03:52:26 +0200
Message-ID: <4E2E1DD9.105@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 21:52:25 -0400
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Pietro Romano <spromano@unina.it>
References: <4E2DE2FC.1050900@ericsson.com> <4E2DF6AF.80805@unina.it>
In-Reply-To: <4E2DF6AF.80805@unina.it>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: "splices@ietf.org" <splices@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [splices] Fwd: Progressing the INVOKE-related work
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, 26 Jul 2011 01:52:29 -0000

Hi Simon Pietro,

yes, that is one of the first options we considered. However, while this
work will need to take into consideration all the requirements derived
from the SPLICES use cases, its scope seems to be somewhat wider. For
example, there have been discussions about PBXs needing an INVOKE-like
mechanism but not using disaggregated media.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On 25/07/2011 7:05 PM, Simon Pietro Romano wrote:
> Dear Gonzalo and all,
> 
> my *individual* opinion is that we might simply re-charter SPLICES in 
> order to allow it to proceed with the (finally) proficuous work we are 
> doing. What's the alternative? We might just close SPLICES as soon as 
> we're done with the framework  (aka "use-cases") document and 
> immediately thereafter go to DISPATCH and ask for the creation of 
> SPLICES-2 as the right venue where to carry out the INVOKE-related work.
> 
> My 2 cents,
> 
> Simon
> 
> Il 25/07/2011 23:41, Gonzalo Camarillo ha scritto:
>> FYI.
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Progressing the INVOKE-related work
>> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:35:38 -0400
>> From: Gonzalo Camarillo<Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>;
>> To: rai@ietf.org
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> as you know, the following draft has lately been discussed in the
>> SPLICES and RAI area mailing lists:
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yusef-splices-invoke/
>>
>>> From all the discussions, there seems to be interest in working on a
>> call/device control mechanism. In order to do that, we need to clearly
>> define the scope of such an effort (i.e., which types of primitives
>> would be in scope and which ones wouldn't).
>>
>> In addition to defining the scope, there are open issues related to how
>> to model the mechanism (i.e., using SIP directly vs. using SIP to
>> establish a control channel). They will need to be resolved at some
>> point as well.
>>
>> As some people have pointed out, the charter of SPLICES excludes working
>> on such a mechanism. Therefore, the next step is to have DISPATCH work
>> on a charter proposal for this effort. Nevertheless, we want to take
>> advantage of the current momentum behind this effort. So, this topic
>> will be discussed in SPLICES, as planned, during the IETF.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Gonzalo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> splices mailing list
>> splices@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/splices
>>
>