Re: [splices] SIP INVOKE method

"Parthasarathi R (partr)" <partr@cisco.com> Tue, 17 May 2011 18:56 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 07E1CE077A for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2011 11:56:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 jdrA8gL2EtlR for <splices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2011 11:56:36 -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 BF156E074F for <splices@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2011 11:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=partr@cisco.com; l=15009; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1305658595; x=1306868195; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:from:to; bh=0NkyqDARKr33/b8adndKVFa9zfk0aKcwE3aWWmMyiXE=; b=WkMUqwMod1NRE6E0uTQv2d0KHWnpEAV0OGo3gHC1HRou2pyoVrPBwUfv hlbCHo+TRuy+twnee3S4tc8l7GBpsPaOs1ZqbbQsXq60yyNzsilBvOSvq h860L8y+poqz0v2QerbrtBgicCmVv8cOT5pP10glWYKyNUn3tN/IR0zXn c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuQAAG/E0k1Io8US/2dsb2JhbACCZZRrjk53qSGeGIYZBIZOjXuKRQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.65,226,1304294400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="89036406"
Received: from bgl-core-3.cisco.com ([72.163.197.18]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 May 2011 18:56:33 +0000
Received: from xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com (xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com [72.163.129.201]) by bgl-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4HIuWWg032486; Tue, 17 May 2011 18:56:32 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 00:26:32 +0530
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CC14C4.22F3CB86"
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:26:30 +0530
Message-ID: <A11921905DA1564D9BCF64A6430A6239054DE574@XMB-BGL-411.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBDA9433@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [splices] SIP INVOKE method
Thread-Index: AcwUlG21RcTDGyn+QBi7uyh9D1M1iwAIncUgAAH/MEA=
References: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBDA8EBF@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CBDA9433@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: 17 May 2011 18:56:32.0211 (UTC) FILETIME=[231C6230:01CC14C4]
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: Tue, 17 May 2011 18:56:39 -0000

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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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