Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate Devices proposal
gao.yang2@zte.com.cn Mon, 25 April 2011 04:27 UTC
Return-Path: <gao.yang2@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: splices@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: splices@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33098E0689 for <splices@ietfc.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -96.59
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.59 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.445, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_64=0.6, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2icp43H61V-l for <splices@ietfc.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:26:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03AF7E00BE for <splices@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 125201917726163; Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:25:36 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.30.3.20] by [192.168.168.16] with StormMail ESMTP id 35180.3679098894; Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:15:03 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p3P4Qjug012126; Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:26:45 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from gao.yang2@zte.com.cn)
In-Reply-To: <6369CB70BFD88942B9705AC1E639A33822CAF444FA@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
To: "Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" <rifatyu@avaya.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: 72946BD9:9432A2C6-4825787D:001619F0; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007
Message-ID: <OF72946BD9.9432A2C6-ON4825787D.001619F0-4825787D.001882DE@zte.com.cn>
From: gao.yang2@zte.com.cn
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:26:42 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-04-25 12:26:45, Serialize complete at 2011-04-25 12:26:45
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 001882DD4825787D_="
X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn p3P4Qjug012126
Cc: "splices@ietf.org" <splices@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate Devices proposal
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: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 04:27:01 -0000
Hi, The base of the handling one session between two separate devices is to coordinate the two separate devices. Comparing with the 3pcc, refer action(draft-yusef-dispatch-action-ref-00) is a new way. And I think it is interesting. But considering Alice can handle the two devices at the same time, I think Alice can answer the call using PC without the refer-action indication by the desk phone. Then, during the adding video stream stage, Alice's desk phone send INVITE(with video) to Alice's PC. I think Alice PC can accept the INVITE request by Alice's manual action, while not by the refer-action indication. One discussion here: the INVITE sent by Alice's desk phone would make the SDP from Bob's Re-INVITE. This is something like 3pcc, a simple desk phone can not have such feature. So, when the session has been anchored on some traditional SIP desk phone, AS(3pcc) seams MUST be need. Thanks, Gao splices-bounces@ietf.org 写于 2011-04-23 00:02:56: > Hi, > > I would like to discuss the following proposal for addressing the > scenario of answering a call using two separate devices: > > > Alice Alice Proxy Bob > PC Desk Phone > | | | | > | | | | > Both Alice's devices subscribe to the reg event package, which allows each > device to discover the capabilities of the other device based on the > feature tags provided by each device. > The Desk Phone knows that the PC supports Video, while the PC knows that > the Desk Phone only supports audio. > | | | | > | | SUBSCRIBE reg | | > | |-------------------->| | > | | 200 OK | | > | |<--------------------| | > | | | | > | SUBSCRIBE reg | | | > |------------------------------------------>| | > | 200 OK | | | > |<------------------------------------------| | > | | | | > | | | | > The scenario starts with an audio call from Bob to Alice > | | | | > | | | INVITE Alice [Audio]| > | | |<--------------------| > | | INVITE Alice [Audio]| | > | |<--------------------| | > | INVITE Alice [Audio]| | | > |<------------------------------------------| | > | | | | > Let's assume that Alice used her PC to answer the call > | | | | > | REFER Refer-To: urn:sip-action:call:answer | > |-------------------->| | | > | 200 OK | | | > |<--------------------| | | > | | | | > | | 200 OK [Audio] | | > | |-------------------->| | > | | | 200 OK [Audio] | > | | |-------------------->| > | CANCEL | | | > |<------------------------------------------| | > | | | | > | |<---dialog1------------------------------->| > | | | | > | |<======audio==============================>| > | | | | > | | | | > > (*) > > | | | | > | | | | > | | | | > The following is a re-INVITE from the remote party (Bob) to add video > to the existing audio call > | | | | > | | | INVITE Alice [A/V] | > | | |<--------------------| > | | INVITE Alice [A/V] | | > | |<--------------------| | > | | 100 Trying | | > | |-------------------->| | > | | | 100 Trying | > | | |-------------------->| > | | | | > The Desk Phone cannot handle video, but it knows that the PC can handle > video, so the Desk Phone initiates a new video INVITE to the PC. > | | | | > | INVITE [Video] | | | > |<--------------------| | | > | 180 | | | > |-------------------->| | | > | | | | > The user can either answer the video call using his PC, or his Desk Phone. > If the user chose to answer the incoming video call using his Desk Phone, > the following REFER will be sent to the PC: > | | | | > | REFER Refer-To: urn:sip-action:call:answer | > |<--------------------| | | > | 200 OK | | | > |-------------------->| | | > | | | | > | 200 OK [Video] | | | > |-------------------->| | | > | | | | > | | 200 OK [A/V] | | > | |-------------------->| | > | | | 200 OK [A/V] | > | | |-------------------->| > | | | | > |<----dialog2-------->|<---dialog1------------------------------->| > | | | | > | |<======audio==============================>| > |<============================video==============================>| > | | | | > | | | | > > > > Now let's assume that Alice is the side that wants to add video to the > existing audio call. The scenario continues after the (*) above. > > Alice uses her PC and attempt to initiate a new video call. Because the > PC is aware that another device is logged in using the same AOR, it will > try to find if there is any existing dialog on the other device by > subscribing to the dialog event package > | | | | > | SUBSCRIBE dialog | | | > |-------------------->| | | > | 200 OK | | | > |<--------------------| | | > | NOTIFY | | | > |<--------------------| | | > | OK | | | > |-------------------->| | | > | | | | > The PC discovers that there is an existing dialog between the Desk Phone > and Bob and present this to Alice for her to choose if she wants to > attach the new video call to the existing audio call or not. In this > case Alice chose to attach the new video call to the existing audio call > | | | | > | | | | > | INVITE [Video] | | | > | Target-Dialog: dialog1 | | > |-------------------->| | | > | 100 | | | > |<--------------------| | | > | | re-INVITE [A/V] | | > | |-------------------->| | > | | | re-INVITE [A/V] | > | | |-------------------->| > | | | 200 OK [A/V] | > | | 200 OK [A/V] |<--------------------| > | |<--------------------| | > | 200 OK [Video] | | | > |<--------------------| | | > | | | | > | | | | > |<----dialog2-------->|<---dialog1------------------------------->| > | | | | > | |<======audio==============================>| > |<============================video==============================>| > | | | | > | | | | > | | | | > > > Regards, > Rifaat > > _______________________________________________ > splices mailing list > splices@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/splices > -------------------------------------------------------- ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.
- [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate Dev… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Peter Musgrave
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Peter Musgrave
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Peter Musgrave
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… gao.yang2
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Elwell, John
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Elwell, John
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Peter Musgrave
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [splices] Answering a Call Using Two Separate… Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)