RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Conference package subscribers

The terms "dial-in" and "dial-out" seem very media-specific, or at least 
connection-oriented-specific.  Is it necessary to have this coupling?  If 
so, then you would need to not only include details of the identity of the 
participant, but the nature of what they are enabled to do:

connection-oriented media type (in/out)
connectionless media
control links, ...

Perhaps this should be more of a single list of "participants" of any type, 
with added attributes about what they are permitted to do, who initiates 
communication.  But, that is jumping to conclusions in the requirements.

So, perhaps the requirement needs to be split apart.

Mike

At 09:08 AM 12/15/2003 -0500, Rosen, Brian wrote:
>I didn't read Jari's answer the same way.
>
>I think you could easily have a PC app that was not a "participant",
>in that it never sends or receives media, but does:
>         Read and Modify Conference Policy
>         Read and Modify Media Policy
>         Read and Modify whatever floor control mechanism there is
>
>This would be a PC app for a "dumb" phone.  The phone is the "participant".
>It would have a dialog with the focus, and send/receive media.  It
>would be conference un-aware.
>
>So, the PC app has to be able to subscribe to the conference package,
>but is neither a dial in, nor a dial out participant.
>
>Brian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: hisham.khartabil@nokia.com [mailto:hisham.khartabil@nokia.com]
> > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 9:01 AM
> > To: Jari.Mutikainen@nokia.com; xcon@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Conference package subscribers
> >
> >
> > I think I understand what you're saying now: You are talking
> > about the participant having 2 different identities, one is a
> > SIP URI and the other is a TEL URI. I originally thought you
> > are talking about the conference focus itself having 2 URIs.
> >
> > If the dial-out list has your TEL URI, and we use the
> > dial-out and dial-in list as indicators to who is allowed to
> > subscribe to a conference package, then your question is: how
> > does the focus know that the SUBSCRIBE that carries your SIP
> > URI is you when it only has your TEL URI?
> >
> > I have 2 solutions:
> >
> > 1. Use your TEL URI in the SUBSCRIBE. Why would you use your
> > SIP URI? You certainly don't have to.
> > 2. Have the dial-out list carry both your TEL and SIP URIs.
> >
> > I think option 1 is far more superior.
> >
> > My original question was: are there any scenarios where a
> > conference state subscriber may not be a potential participant?
> >
> > Another question: Are there any scenarios where the
> > participant is not allowed to subscribe to the conference package.
> >
> > If the answer to the above 2 questions is yes, then we need a
> > separate privilege list for conference package subscribers.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Hisham
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mutikainen Jari (NMP-MSW/Helsinki)
> > > Sent: 15.December.2003 15:49
> > > To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP-MSW/Helsinki); xcon@ietf.org
> > > Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Conference package subscribers
> > >
> > >
> > > I might want to follow the conference status (and manage it
> > > if I'm the host) from my PC client, and participate from a
> > > legacy mobile/PSTN device. Even if I'm using a single device,
> > > I might have a device that does not support VoIP but supports
> > > non-RT SIP, so I'm using my SIP subscription and it's SIP URI
> > > to subscribe, but Tel URI to join.
> > >
> > > Now, the only way to tie these is that we have a separate
> > > list for participants that are allowed to subscribe? In
> > > dial-in case it could be possible to put both URIs to the
> > > Dial-In list, but in Dial-out case it is impossible, as the
> > > server tries to invite both, even they mean a single participant?
> > >
> > > BR,
> > > Jari
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: xcon-admin@ietf.org [mailto:xcon-admin@ietf.org]On
> > > Behalf Of ext
> > > > hisham.khartabil@nokia.com
> > > > Sent: 15 December, 2003 15:06
> > > > To: Mutikainen Jari (NMP-MSW/Helsinki); xcon@ietf.org
> > > > Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Conference package
> > subscribers
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jari,
> > > >
> > > > You are right, if you use a non-sip protocol to join the
> > conference.
> > > >
> > > > In any case, this is not related to the questions I ask that
> > > > are related who is allowed to subscribe to the conference
> > > > state event package.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Hisham
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Mutikainen Jari (NMP-MSW/Helsinki)
> > > > > Sent: 15.December.2003 15:02
> > > > > To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP-MSW/Helsinki); xcon@ietf.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Conference package
> > > subscribers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The address from where I subscribe the conference event might
> > > > > be diffrent to the addres from where I'm joining to the
> > > conference.
> > > > >
> > > > > BR,
> > > > > Jari
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: xcon-admin@ietf.org [mailto:xcon-admin@ietf.org]On
> > > > > Behalf Of ext
> > > > > > hisham.khartabil@nokia.com
> > > > > > Sent: 15 December, 2003 14:55
> > > > > > To: xcon@ietf.org
> > > > > > Subject: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: Conference package
> > subscribers
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is in reference to requirement REQ-H5 in
> > > > > >
> > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-reqs-00.txt
> > > > >
> > > > >    REQ-H5: It SHOULD be possible to define users who are
> > > allowed to
> > > > >    subscribe to conference event package [4]
> > > > >
> > > > > Should this be a separate list? or should a combination of
> > > > > Dial-out list, Dial-in list be sufficient? i.e. only
> > > > > participants and potential participants can subscribe to the
> > > > > conference event package (outside users not allowed)?
> > > > >
> > > > > In any case, I think the requirement needs to stay, but needs
> > > > > rewording according to the conclusions we come up with that
> > > > > answer the above question.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Hisham
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > XCON mailing list
> > > > > XCON@ietf.org
> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > XCON mailing list
> > > XCON@ietf.org
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > XCON mailing list
> > XCON@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
>XCON mailing list
>XCON@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon

_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon