RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: de-activating a conference

["Even, Roni" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I did not think that the conference work was also addressing reservation
systems and that is why it is not clear to me why we need the start and stop
time of a conference in CPCP. If conference reservation is in the scope of
the work then we need some more parameters in CPCP for supporting it. We
also need to understand what it may support for example can I give a start
time in 2050, what about next month, can I learn from CPCP what resources
are available at a specific time.  If the start and stop time are only what
they sound and the application is handled by an application server then what
is the difference between having a start and stop time and letting the
application server start the conference when the scheduled time has arrived
Thanks
Roni Even

*************************************
Roni Even

Polycom Israel

Tel: [phone]
Cell: [phone]
email:[e-mail]
*******************************************


-----Original Message-----
From: Drage, Keith (Keith) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 6:55 PM
To: 'Rosen, Brian'; 'Even, Roni'
Cc: '[e-mail]'; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: de-activating a conference


I do not remember seeing the existence of this separate protocol in any of
the conferencing documents so far (either in SIPPING or XCON). (If I am
wrong then pointers gratefully received). If it exists, then I think we
should clearly identify what its scope is, if only to aid the discussion of
what the other protocols may or may not do.

We clearly need a start and stop time for conferencing. At the moment the
only protocol it can be in is the CPCP. If we are going to have an informed
discussion about why it is not in CPCP we need to understand clearly what
the alternative protocol is.

regards

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rosen, Brian [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: 06 January 2004 14:14
> To: 'Even, Roni'
> Cc: '[e-mail]'; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: de-activating a conference
> 
> 
> I don't like this idea because I think that we need a 
> standardized interface
> for scheduling and "external application server" sounds very 
> proprietary to
> me.  I guess I could be convinced we need a separate interface, with a
> separate protocol (maybe it could be iCal), but I'm not yet convinced
> just specifying a start time in the future isn't a sufficient 
> reservation
> mechanism.
> 
> Brian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Even, Roni [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 7:22 AM
> To: 'Rosen, Brian'; '[e-mail]'; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: de-activating a conference
> 
> 
> Brian,
> My suggestion is not to have reservation in the conference policy. The
> conference policy is used by the focus according to the 
> conference framework
> and the focus is not the place for handling reservation. I think that
> reservation is handled by an external application server that 
> will start the
> conference using CPCP at the time when the conference 
> scheduled time has
> arrived. The focus may use the conference duration 
> information in order to
> notify the participants that it the conference end-time is coming and
> terminate the conference. Extension of the should be done 
> using CPCP either
> by the participant or an application server.
> Roni
> 
> *************************************
> Roni Even
> VP Product Planning
> Polycom Israel
> 
> Tel: [phone]
> Cell: [phone]
> email:[e-mail]
> *******************************************
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rosen, Brian [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 4:25 PM
> To: '[e-mail]'; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: de-activating a conference
> 
> 
> Again, I'm worried about "privileged users".  I think we need 
> to finish
> some discussions we started a while ago that essentially are 
> semantics.
> What is an "inactivated" conference, and how does it differ from a
> conference that can be re-instantiated (a weekly meeting for example)?
> 
> Brian
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 7:57 AM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: [XCON] CPCP Requirement: de-activating a conference
> > 
> > 
> > This is in reference to requirement REQ-B9 in 
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-reqs-00.txt
> > 
> >    REQ-B9: It MUST be possible to inactive a conference for defined
> >    period of time.
> > 
> > There are start and stop times for a conference. A conference 
> > might live for days, weeks or even months. Should a 
> > conference policy, using CPCP, allow a privileged user to 
> > de-activate a conference for a period of time within the 
> > start and stop times of a conference? Examples are 
> > administrator is performing some maintenance.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Hisham
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > XCON mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> XCON mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> 
> _______________________________________________
> XCON mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> 

_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon