Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method

"Parthasarathi R (partr)" <partr@cisco.com> Wed, 18 May 2011 13:06 UTC

Return-Path: <partr@cisco.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 454E8E0737 for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 May 2011 06:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 pH-kH5k4J6zq for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 May 2011 06:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A95E0714 for <splices@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 May 2011 06:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=partr@cisco.com; l=5267; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1305724003; x=1306933603; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to; bh=xhNAUvm9u+m1DyMvM4YBI+x4EOqU61prYAkFs7R0vAU=; b=RMG/co/n/7ZZcQmpkno1wTng9R6YwgAcI5mxP00/qEQYViIFj+VwEfF0 e1ehbsXKYCwdqpa7FFRCfsU4wteUq3x6jg0OVBu8Ao69sfu0fIYKuYR0k QBYc/M0gPLZi2+adehyJNOzgMPJ2bGue6guCzoZuGGJywTNxg1I5xW2zF Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiABANXD001Io8UT/2dsb2JhbACXTI5Md4hwoHeeCYYZBIZOjXuKRQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,231,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="89220534"
Received: from bgl-core-4.cisco.com ([72.163.197.19]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 May 2011 13:06:41 +0000
Received: from xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com (xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com [72.163.129.201]) by bgl-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4ID6eWJ025745; Wed, 18 May 2011 13:06:40 GMT
Received: from xmb-bgl-411.cisco.com ([72.163.129.207]) by xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 18 May 2011 18:36:40 +0530
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 18:36:39 +0530
Message-ID: <A11921905DA1564D9BCF64A6430A6239054DE7EB@XMB-BGL-411.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBE5C3E5@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
Thread-Index: AcwUlG21RcTDGyn+QBi7uyh9D1M1iwAIncUgAAH/MEAAJAxbgAABYJewAADBXvAAAQFB4A==
References: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBDA8EBF@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBDA9433@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <A11921905DA1564D9BCF64A6430A6239054DE574@XMB-BGL-411.cisco.com> <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBE5C341@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <A11921905DA1564D9BCF64A6430A6239054DE7DC@XMB-BGL-411.cisco.com> <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBE5C3E5@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
From: "Parthasarathi R (partr)" <partr@cisco.com>
To: "Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com>, <splices@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 May 2011 13:06:40.0059 (UTC) FILETIME=[6D39F0B0:01CC155C]
Subject: Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
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: Wed, 18 May 2011 13:06:44 -0000

Rifaat,

Thanks for the clarification. Please include the text in the next revision to show how multiple simultaneous INVOKE operation happens within the dialog & abort opertion parameter in action URN.

Thanks
Partha 

-----Original Message-----
From: Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat) [mailto:rifatyu@avaya.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 6:25 PM
To: Parthasarathi R (partr); splices@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [splices] SIP INVOKE method

Inline...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parthasarathi R (partr) [mailto:partr@cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:27 AM
> To: Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat); splices@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
> 
> Rifaat,
> 
> SUBSCRIBE creates the dialog and within the created subscribe based 
> dialog, INVOKE method (transaction) is sent from subscriber to perform 
> the specific action based on the mentioned URN. Please correct me in 
> case I misunderstand your proposal.
> 
Yes, that is correct.

> Please read inline
> 
> Thanks
> Partha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat) [mailto:rifatyu@avaya.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 5:07 PM
> To: Parthasarathi R (partr); splices@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
> 
> Inline...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Parthasarathi R (partr) [mailto:partr@cisco.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 2:57 PM
> > To: Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat); splices@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
> >
> > Rifaat,
> >
> > I skimmed through your draft. I like the idea of controlling remote 
> > UA action using new method (INVOKE). Few comments in the draft:
> >
> > 1) Sec 4.1: SUBSCRIBE with expire=0 is used to terminate INVOKE 
> > dialog by INVOKE-Issuer. Whether it is ok to "INVOKE with expire=0" 
> > terminate INVOKE dialog as it avoids the dependency on SUBSCRIBE message to terminate.
> >
> The new plan is to remove the implicit subscription.
> 
> <Partha> How is it possible for INVOKE-Issuer to abort or stop the 
> action in case required? </Partha>
> 
One possible way is to define a parameter to the URN and then resend the INVOKE request.
For example, urn:invoke:whatever;abort

> 
> > 2) I foresee the complexity in creating explicit subscription 
> > because two dialog creation methods (INVOKE & SUBSCRIBE) are used to 
> > make the single action. It will be good in case INVOKE acts similar 
> > to INVITE (Dialog creation & Action). INVITE has the implicit action 
> > like "ring the phone" or "auto- answer" whereas INVOKE has 
> > explicitly mention the action to be done in INVOKE- recipient.
> >
> I am not sure that I understand your comment, but with the new plan 
> the INVOKE will NOT create a dialog.
> 
> 
> > 3) Do you foresee INVOKE dialog creation which change the action 
> > within INVOKE dialog. For example: Following three actions using 
> > single INVOKE dialog creation but updating the action based on the
> application information..
> >
> >      Action 1:  Create the call
> >      Action 2:  Hold the call
> >      Action 3:  Terminate the call
> >
> In this case, I expect the INVOKE-Issuer to first create a 
> subscription and then to send the INVOKE requests in the context of that dialog.
> 
> <Partha>
> In case INVOKE is mid-dialog transaction within SUBSCRIBE dialog, then 
> whether multiple simultaneous INVOKE operation is allowed or not. Example
>               1) INVOKE hold action
>               2) Even before INVOKE hold completion NOTIFY receives, 
> INVOKE terminate call action
> 
> </Partha>
> 
Yes, that should be possible.

> > Thanks
> > Partha
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: splices-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:splices-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 10:57 PM
> > To: Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat); splices@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method Thank you all for your 
> > quick review and feedback so far.
> > I will work on a new version of the draft that removes the implicit 
> > subscription.
> >
> > Please, let me know if you have any other comments beside the 
> > implicit subscription issue.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rifaat
> >
> >
> > From: splices-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:splices-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 9:15 AM
> > To: splices@ietf.org
> > Subject: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > As discussed in the last SPLICES WG meeting in Prague, the REFER 
> > method is overloaded and has limitations that prevents it from being 
> > the ideal method for action invocation.
> > We have worked on the following new draft that defines a new SIP 
> > method to be used for invoking actions:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yusef-splices-invoke/
> >
> > We would appreciate it if people review the document and provide us 
> > with their feedback.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rifaat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >