[splices] INVOKE Actions Scope

"Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com> Sat, 18 June 2011 13:37 UTC

Return-Path: <rifatyu@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: splices@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: splices@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE52A21F868E for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Jun 2011 06:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.197
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.402, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ST-NSfS3HWWM for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Jun 2011 06:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47ADE21F8609 for <splices@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Jun 2011 06:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8JAKKp/E2HCzI1/2dsb2JhbABSpl9wB4ERh1ugJ4NqApp/hioElluLIA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,385,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="285737389"
Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2011 09:37:23 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,385,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="667746825"
Received: from unknown (HELO DC-US1HCEX4.global.avaya.com) ([]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2011 09:37:23 -0400
Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([]) by DC-US1HCEX4.global.avaya.com ([]) with mapi; Sat, 18 Jun 2011 09:37:22 -0400
From: "Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com>
To: "splices@ietf.org" <splices@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 09:37:22 -0400
Thread-Topic: [splices] INVOKE Actions Scope
Thread-Index: AcwtvNor+GLsDwmwQE6T2hYqfPb1Ag==
Message-ID: <4CA2C4386DB56F4589D436E1C3C86F752230509C3B@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [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: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 13:37:24 -0000


I would like to start a discussion that I hope would allow us to converge on an approriate scope for the first release of this draft.
The following is my first attempt at defining this scope:

1. An Action can manipulate a dialog or a multimedia session.
2. An Action can manipulate one or more dialogs or sessions at the same time.
3. An Action can manipulate the state of a physical "feature" of a device, e.g. transducer.
4. An Action can invoke a well-defined telephony "feature" on the UA, e.g.hold.
5. An Action cannot replace an existing SIP mechanism, e.g. offer/answer.
6. An Action cannot dictate the UI behavior of the target UA.

Any thoughts?