> 1) Get this syntax agreed as soon as possible because it is needed by
> the industry in the today's PSTN/SIP mixed environment.
Well, I have here to make the observation that SIP-PSTN is not the only mixed environment.
SIP is also used on IP networks and on the Internet and the UUI may look there vastly more different - probably extensible and very powerful. And it may be just as urgent.
So it appears the SIP UUI may end up with two tracks, one for compatibility with ISDN and the other for the IP networks and the Internet.
What do the authors think?
Henry
On 11/20/08 9:03 AM, "Laura Liess" <Laura.Liess@xxxxxx> wrote:
> This is precisely my concern. By doing this we are adopting this syntax
> for carrying data for what will eventually be *SIP* services. Is this
> *really* the way we want to support those services in a native sip
> environment?
Paul,
I do not see why we should not do both and leave the decision to the market.
IETF did this in the past.
1) Get this syntax agreed as soon as possible because it is needed by
the industry in the today's PSTN/SIP mixed environment. If we do not come up
very soon with a standard, people will use proprietary extenssions. I think
we should avoid this. There are no technical reasons not to move on with the
draft.
2) In the long term we could develop a "native sip" syntax which is more
flexible, easier to implement, whatever.... It will have advantages in a
"sip native" environment and it will be adopted when the "native sip"
environement is in place.
Laura
>
> Once its done it will not make sense to develop a different syntax for
> native sip use.
>
> If we go this way, every sip entity that needs to deal with these will
> need to have the needed ASN.1 encoding/decoding logic. I don't know if
> that is trivial to special case because I don't know what all the various
> formats are. But it would at least be annoying.
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>
>>> Until we solve this with an appropriate mechanism, SIP will not
>>> make headway into areas such as contact centers.
>>>
>>> And, there is a limit on the size of data - please read the draft.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm - you are right that when I read it, I had missed the key part of
>>
>> Note that ISDN limits UUI to 128 octets in length. While this header
>> field has no such limitations, transporting UUI longer than 128
>> octets will result in interoperability failures when interworking
>> with ISDN.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And the draft says nothing about proxy inspection and routing. I
>>> mentioned it in my email because we know that clever implementors will
>>> do clever things.
>>>
>>> The draft is not making the arguments you specify.
>>>
>>> So, if I remove the text in your comments about this being an ISDN
>>> parameter mapping issue, the size being unlimited, and problematic proxy
>>> behavior, I don't think there are any remaining issues.
>>>
>>> If you have issues with the requirements in the draft, let us know so we
>>> can clarify them.
>>>
>> I can easily imagine cases where customer sensitize information was
>> transfered over this and it was going to an remote agent phone that went
>> through another trust domain to route the call to the agent. In these
>> cases, I think an important requirement would be to protect the draft
>> from authorized access by intermediaries.
>>
>>>
>>
>> Cullen in my individual contributor role
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
>> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
>> Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
>> Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
> Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
>
_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
