Subject: Re: [dispatch] New Version Notification for draft-worley-service-example-04

From: "Dale Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:18:11 -0400

I've submitted a new revision of a service example for music on hold.
Since the design is getting debugged and we've seen implementations in
real products, I would like to propose that this draft be sent to Bliss
in order to be approved as an addition to the service examples RFC
(5359), as the method described in the draft has some advantages
relative to the method in section 2.3 of RFC 5359.

Dale

On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 17:51 -0700, IETF I-D Submission Tool wrote:
> A new version of I-D, draft-worley-service-example-04.txt has been
> successfuly submitted by Dale Worley and posted to the IETF
> repository.
> 
> Filename:	 draft-worley-service-example
> Revision:	 04
> Title:		 Session Initiation Protocol Service Example -- Music on Hold
> Creation_date:	 2009-10-25
> WG ID:		 Independent Submission
> Number_of_pages: 32
> 
> Abstract:
> The "music on hold" feature is one of the most desired features of
> telephone systems in the business environment.  "Music on hold" is
> where, when one party to a call has the call "on hold", that party's
> telephone provides an audio stream (often music) to be heard by the
> other party.  Architectural features of SIP make it difficult to
> implement music-on-hold in a way that is fully compliant with the
> standards.  The implementation of music-on-hold described in this
> document is fully effective and standards-compliant, but has a number
> of advantages over the methods previously documented.  In particular,
> it is less likely to produce peculiar user interface effects and more
> likely to work in systems which perform authentication than the
> method of RFC 5359.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-worley-service-example-04

---

From: Shida Schubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:00:00 +0900

Dale,

  Is your intent to update RFC5359 to have this
replace the current section 2.3 or do you see this draft
as a standalone informational draft describing a better
way of doing Music on Hold?

  Regards
   Shida

On Oct 27, 2009, at 3:18 AM, Dale Worley wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

---

From: "Dale Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:51:00 -0400

> way of doing Music on Hold?

In regard to this draft's subject matter, it is squarely in the realm
that RFC 5359 attempts to describe.  If the RFC was just an RFC, I would
consider this draft to be independent.  But since RFC 5359 has been
christened BCP 144, I see this draft as updating the BCP for this realm
of activity.

Within that philosophy, this draft could be interpreted as replacing
section 2.3 of RFC 5359 or as providing an additional "best" method,
effectively being section 2.19.  Although I favor the first approach,
the working group may favor the second.

Dale