|
One
more issue that needs to be addressed:
In
section 4.4 it is written:
For any given service identifier, labels can be removed
right-to-left and the resulting URN is still valid, referring a more generic
service, with the except of the top-level service identifier and possibly the
first sub-service or sub-application identifier. In other words, if a
service identifier 'w.x.y.z' exists, the URNs 'w.x' and 'w.x.y' are also
valid service identifiers.
While this is valid for some extensions, it is also clear that to make a general statement that it is possible to revert bach to the first sub-service is not always the case. In the example in the current version of the draft the <exampletelephony.version1> shows how the version1 cannot be seen as a service on its own. Rather it is possible to revert back from <exampletelephony.version1> to <exampletlephony> but not any further. I hope the next version of the draft can correct this text. I leave to Keith to figure out the detailed text but can offer a proposal. For some service identifiers, labels can be removed right-to-left
and the resulting URN is still valid, referring a more generic or basic service.
This can for example apply when a service is customised or a version-2 is
launced. If a service identifier 'w.x'
exists, the URNs 'w.x.y' or 'w.x.y.z' can be valid service identifiers
customising the service 'w.x'. In this case backwards compatibility to the
service 'w.x' can be supported. Labels cannot be removed past a
defined basic service.
/atle From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Atle Monrad Sent: 16. desember 2008 12:14 To: sipping; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) Cc: 3GPP_TSG_CT_WG1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Review ofdraft-drage-sipping-service-identification-02 I
forgot one more issues:
The
draft outlines the top level identifiers to be 3gpp-service and
3gpp-application. In order to align with this, I assume that the examples
throughout the draft shall be:
P-Asserted/Preferred-Service: urn:urn-xxx:3gpp-service.exampletelephony.version1>
/atle From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Atle Monrad Sent: 16. desember 2008 12:05 To: sipping; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) Cc: 3GPP_TSG_CT_WG1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Review ofdraft-drage-sipping-service-identification-02 I have
some further comments to the draft that also would be useful to get on board in
the next version.
It is
my understanding that the P-Preferred-Service and P-Asserted-Service headers
shall contain the complete URN. This is also described in the introduction.
However, in section 1 and in section 6 of the draft the P-P-S and the P-A-S
headers has urn's like <urn-xxx:exampletelephony.version1>. To my
understanding the complete urn shall be
<urn:urn-xxx:exampletelephony.version1>. In section 6; note also the
nit "example-telephony" (the dash shall be removed).
I also
assume that section 4.1 and 4.2 also needs to be updated to reflect that the
complete URN shall be included in P-P-S and P-A-S headers.
3GPP
assumes that the P-P-S and P-A-S headers shall contain the complete urn, thus it
is necessary to align the draft.
/atle
|
_______________________________________________ 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
