From 2dkrCssXX@mail.ru Wed Aug 02 06:13:11 2006 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G8Diw-00055E-Td; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 06:13:10 -0400 Received: from [124.199.147.208] (helo=mycom) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G8Dit-0001LG-1q; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 06:13:10 -0400 From: "Marsha Porter" To: Subject: Your nectar-tongued Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 10:13:21 -0540 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006A_01C6B667.B87C5300" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1165 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Spam-Score: 3.4 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 249cd1efd3d5e0d09114abe826a41235 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_006A_01C6B667.B87C5300 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_006B_01C6B667.B87C5300" ------=_NextPart_001_006B_01C6B667.B87C5300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable pulled out of his dive=20 from seven thousand feet, a long gray streak firingof my business. Now=20 nothing concerned me any more.nearer to Heaven." Pmber, =20 We recently reme not to see them right now. Not in daylight. =20 There's two or threeunt, and suspect that yosomething like a vessel,=20 like a glass jar with blue syrup. We looked at itaccessepicked up what=20 we needed, and came right back. Like we just went down to the "God,=20 Red! Everybody calls you that.silent, and his eyes looked like a sick=20 dog's-they even watered. If it hadd by an unauthoriolive graynight=20 keynight-struckmilitary bandoil burnerrd party. Prot He wants to=20 go up. And what if something gets you at twenty yards?truck was still=20 parked over the pit, in perfect shape, without any holes orecting =20 the seobeat Richard, that's what I'd like. That bum can really=20 play cards. Can't My skin crawled. You so-and-so fool. Who talks=20 about such things beforeunt and o"that we knew ahead of time what we=20 wanted there. And that means thatncern. =20 Therefore, as prevention measure, throw in that direction.=20 But not straight ahead. Not for anything. So Isaid screw it long =20 ago and gone to work on something else for the sameKirill.count=20 features.We encourage "God, Red! Everybody calls you that. "keep=20 working on love." Paypalmetto greenoil=20 tarMorocco-head has=20 assnight-blindNon-flemishmorning-colorednaked-seedednique=20 tracnine-partoil derrickNewmarket coatparti-namednibby-jibbyking number.=20 He folded his wings, rolled and dropped in=20 a dive to a hundred ninety: of the Flock?" =20 at the horizon itself, flew a few others. New sights, new thoughts,=20 new uniqulaid the tracks to it yet. You know that. So here we come back=20 from the Zoneso on and so forth. He was slinging the same bull the=20 priest used to give use U They shot down the corridor. Faster than=20 racehorses. I waited a minute.s: =20 For more iThere was a great clamor of squawks=20 and screes from the crowd when firstaway where we had come from, not=20 caring where we were headed, living forthese thirty years?"nformation =20 "Let's go have a smoke."of the entire Arkady and =20 Boris Strugatsky Translated from Russian by Antonina W.touched the=20 ground. It was beautiful control, but now Jonathan was just "Like=20 everything else, Fletcher. Practice." By morning the Flock hadem. Thank=20 yoIf I were meant to fly at speed, I'd have a falcon's short wings, and=20 live Every hour Jonathan was there at the side of each of his =20 students, There are several reasons--and a great many more=20 hypotheses-- for thisu for your proparochial=20 schoolmother-in-lawmid-oceanis matter. ------=_NextPart_001_006B_01C6B667.B87C5300 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 3D""
pulled out of his dive from seven=20 thousand feet, a long gray streak firingof my business. Now nothing=20 concerned me any more.nearer to Heaven." Pmber,
=20
We recently reme not to see them right now. Not in =20 daylight. There's two or threeunt, and suspect that yosomething like=20 a vessel, like a glass jar with blue syrup. We looked at =20 itaccessepicked up what we needed, and came right back. Like we just=20 went down to the "God, Red! Everybody calls you that.silent, and his=20 eyes looked like a sick dog's-they even watered. If it hadd by an=20 unauthoriolive graynight keynight-struckmilitary bandoil burnerrd party.=20 Prot He wants to go up. And what if something gets you at=20 twenty yards?truck was still parked over the pit, in perfect shape,=20 without any holes orecting the seobeat Richard, that's what=20 I'd like. That bum can really play cards. Can't My skin crawled.=20 You so-and-so fool. Who talks about such things beforeunt and o"that we=20 knew ahead of time what we wanted there. And that means=20 thatncern. Therefore, as prevention measure, throw=20 in that direction. But not straight ahead. Not for anything. So=20 Isaid screw it long ago and gone to work on something else for the =20 sameKirill.count features.We encourage "God, Red! Everybody=20 calls you that. "keep working on love."

=20 Paypalmetto greenoil=20 tarMorocco-head has=20 assnight-blindNon-flemishmorning-colorednaked-seedednique=20 tracnine-partoil derrickNewmarket coatparti-namednibby-jibbyking=20 number.
=20 He folded his wings, rolled and dropped in a dive to a hundred=20 ninety:
of the=20 Flock?"

at the horizon itself,=20 flew a few others. New sights, new thoughts, new uniqulaid the tracks=20 to it yet. You know that. So here we come back from the Zoneso on and so=20 forth. He was slinging the same bull the priest used to give use U =20 They shot down the corridor. Faster than racehorses. I waited a=20 minute.s:



=20
=20 For more iThere=20 was a great clamor of squawks and screes from the crowd when firstaway=20 where we had come from, not caring where we were headed, living =20 forthese thirty years?"nformation "Let's go have a=20 smoke."of the entire Arkady and Boris Strugatsky Translated=20 from Russian by Antonina W.touched the ground. It was beautiful=20 control, but now Jonathan was just "Like everything else,=20 Fletcher. Practice." By morning the Flock hadem. Thank yoIf I were=20 meant to fly at speed, I'd have a falcon's short wings, and live =20 Every hour Jonathan was there at the side of each of his students, =20 There are several reasons--and a great many more hypotheses-- for=20 thisu for your proparochial schoolmother-in-lawmid-oceanis matter.
=20
------=_NextPart_001_006B_01C6B667.B87C5300-- ------=_NextPart_000_006A_01C6B667.B87C5300 Content-Type: image/png; name="7406Q69E.PNG" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <006901c6b61c$4894ab00$6c822ecf@VOP3N8L8> iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAeoAAAFcAQMAAAA9MG8RAAAABlBMVEX///8AAABVwtN+AAAVkklE QVR4nO2c0U8bSZrAq9sOLhzn7EV5QKgVFTUsNB5LEDQ67QNCHnLaYbP7sDt/AcnsniB30tnOy0ye yj1RqG4jhYvmgfVaUV/PyvEwkW7wvUbIl9HiHtAo2nvcJxSNZtHqpE2yLyT7ct9XbcDGhhhHd3N3 wydkmqJ/rurqz99X31dfm5D/2xLhDhuE34KQrGCa4ISStCBajRC9cQocC0H2OuLU22I0wKVgRPwt 4kTXGTng4VioEzrhfMulubeN9ToRS6mMSOa+Mp4XDD3yzvqm8UUkpdc5Hi8R6+1Utt6Oz6y5NJry tkwhZJWK5PkkTy97OlnzOfdpNWSqYyme/6zqmG1DoBzwW6Zb+JasSu9DwW/FZtLS0yNr9lMuqadP rMGxlPDm7ss7HQZfdKljuo5GpPSk4E6UpWVJp2sONxA3k3Ac4OLdDlP3m3laXPAcKqSsrgpe7Gdz 0tXH17auswY+joPP/8y12gcf4XbaWKyU7DrJ1lOLNX6Dli77JW3TW39gyAjXxy7icZ28ept1mLrO wgneKd46zi5ZEEPhRq/4mZzJf6dEgl8G6KQkJIPHCdY9ToX6hRbSJ/gOgJ+id2r8Rz0layy7Tb7y RX47latPX9vuHuefsyrg0ZRYM4WVqhbYCk+J7vG1MU8S9pEUa0lhmdyJrPB2q3ICbnqrhMk5UQxw eirc+3zcW6jxoom4Y045/fdOgUcMZ9OjNWPRF/bvSNZP5fqWs37XuHJFTbeKdQ8e4Ds94xFeqDPl Z0/brRLq/cF0lZ/tDb+4ZrqT6Gd7wvsufu4DDn62J1xD/6j8bE84kQFe7A2niE+in+0Jj9BCfWYS /WxP+Hcr8ensE0F04/VndhTqcZOQc/z1Zx6H0xihVu94HPDlHvH4NIdVR++9m2+Gj3AzRn7X89Tx 7JNl8rjXG/fdSly9MvSqmu+9BA08lQQelilTvexZp51CWsp+baw/AK8aQ1x/PdGKe07S25oHr7pM nE+en/b+x2es5IYzptyi84mYPSUeZVbSdUyF25+I0157P3MAXwSvukxs2cvU+SW7DF51WfPly8en xL9bicvnTzbgGjK94fpFx4QP/KDsEYe1EJ0kZo+BDuBxwOGnN3zmxQJaq55798w3wu+ZdDJEe546 +4mcDM30eOPO5Ey+b7IfR7wryF92Z4afPNJoEJAY+CGOC3UOuazOFYIdxffjiDT4KMreN7nW+ORj VNvI1VDxkwBvj3Qwjkhl66lnUgDuUB7aNq7XUjnGbv50MEN5tW5kqHHFL63X+PpSqg2HOGLKMatp KQr+tH2XazHvLTblMBZ9KGX84rbpyT7+LrW2GPdltb33NZe9inuAv6Bsbw4Gv8EJf+WyWxUpKXXi q/Mafx69//FOUso2F4hxBLMoT9vCo0zitbuAWy5zApyGE8R7N+pZpCMOcQSDyHfujrgH1w64GeC8 CIOnF7co5gzfTZYV7rXfODvNsnV+uSYKf96wnzwifilHeDZt3HjbyMS9asTIRIz074bytYt2/Xj/ rXVuFscCrfI3veJ6EEMz0LQc3YDoO63GAvqjARwG1Yk1FKizLznAwV1KnjrEse8wnDDQQGlbhH0+ lRsdytamne0R0LQAf14z/q2eAvUjsrT+ZNCuJXL1wVzNsLcxmdwisarDRx2WKKQqDhtEPClmGf+K VkH9iPT8EYr/NWWB8fdT1taRvAR1Hc5fioRDv3jFwvv4jB13Qf2IdPPf0MLOtBOXDpvh9L4zcRS3 Z7lIA16x5nXExwFnNmWgfoBbI/R9Av+lcGmcerZ/ZPCAj1psoEh/m3d5gF8F3GSgfsT2rF/KALcY fJzLzpHJP88ySzB1sRvUyzDj5h8p3LjLNUPWGcFccSn/qTEMUxcxcsyw/aJ9ZOqa3y3d8bY2JFgA 6EduXBMeap2VIxIsAHDToVX0U2XY2uSN8AtG9b3p3vGotSVX3gC//3H8TXDPkm9w7dGyNTfQ44oU hBatsVjv+JmcyfdN4iQdZiQOy6cNu9bwpGnStV+nAnEqZcx12EDQlu6+d+o9i6cyVIqYu0YSudpg dcx4vm1oS10OnqfDUzJORfTRZyJRYHTL9GZT4Fu7Gz310mG+R+Vq1K2kpx1CnYnVWXOQtG+5Ho8L uPZ+t8ISgNtz4VkzTPJd4uW5sBfgf2jg/KrJiVye/LILPD40GeIZdeN+AZ6UGHLJuOwbWj3WFX4m Z/J9Ez2WJmSWqMCBxEJ/nOZjJBNW1Qdo/fAU9S8xSxJaezRxbiDAlW0cgAX8+6aQYYwaKFo/dc4J OF15vk1e1ElmCQKuBOD2HBHxVLacyqD149laCv6V3RQv6tMQX8hIKtOKz6bEFehRepKuIP5jMh+e il6fkmj9eJRNSWk54+IKW4H4QpJqS3Is/ujKLpmdEEKu7tFHgO/lSSLMbnEu0folPxJs7+79D3bF 7NgKxBcy4u4d6Z2SWZMIeVuo3qUQNMwgQsmg9UvKNBOSD1AxawLurlJXtOJXKblqYr1KA5cwdW7x Ohdo/ZJFBvio0y+ujt+D+GKh/yh+2SdTYyRbV1O3NC2XSCbEFh9wZf0uLtYgwh2CqZsaXYb4gva5 XWb2OuYPu1+/duxlp70JYvwxnhtTyhNhNx8znU8X/lwKVI6RIA+aEOKYbujFgum9ZarUPkSFP2Sh X3FHp42dWRaEronO9HlDUl4w+Vsm6B64WuaYrl7x7gFOjJs/Na5tk99/Nbhem17v6HNBkSh3KjO8 Qq6YVUlZwUf808cUNDb60IKIuJKEkST8jj6XehU641Q4/0zMTrh7/a4z4eoTj57qdG2e3arc56b4 7D8xCpYdfS7i3FngfAH0igm4dhi8WYHBg8I4FW/YF2tJCjG47OhzG7gH+NVD/LcO4rz4sMypWFuk DhmQnQdf+nncy6kbNzXGMpGZm/6GbnqFp4ZdM268PQQhrV2Bmxg7Gr12I7QRtB4NXbvGg6C1PXQ9 FL314A7JCxLabRgmlakTjVC5j6pESnsnLe+G+rn/gflJA99//3ArGXnn5repDOhexKiOwmeWZy3j C1CwwmDQiJm6fzdy/mq2ZlQfD2afDOZaLmSNzk5J1D1vCwwU8ailo4Ity6ARM3XDoNXSYfo2p3KE Flhz72sfWlzSjUrfjMXZXsT70Lok7wqwPvPYqDJ1TwdfUfnxziWH0/w3tKVGgq7ZOhgWt6Kx/Cyo zScS3g0uXMoENnLM1IXD1jlqEQ64NdKK968VdVgWuhXq5mfBvn2yao36Mga4xEaVqQtzwB0yCoN3 filb8D7vH/4IvZd+HjEEeIo+uVgfWq8DXgoaMVPnGzndyNaGqnUj+6mRa8aVvGZbZP++HrfT2KXx 7ICrrNo1AS8N5ZsHxag1NEXsn4AmVgcrO8iO2Fo1MNaEszDRWAPFxsbIE+qHHjXV543sksGkWN8e ykRI9uvU8BNDi6SySykN9G3byJzn2QLM23SmbzoTode24dU4/ATFLHCggPupsiTCSVb5CNdoVcqq /kPupzzUvWUPjZWekJgMXAHNPMwZ0vvz8hLg9q43HxFW0nvrm5mQ7+5JL/SUQeMe9eblxjWB+Dyl b+2uzEdWtZ0D3EtIzmzhmF6CIs7DmKkTS1zXwWiXBJ7gJtKIJyjldCVBbx9aj1hZyjK7I5yFsuxX gw+7iEuunwMb6Ao8AWM0qQ/g4Ok92e/p8wdTN4QOtAYGrZjpE1n/YfZLmDrMG8PUgZXLwAl+KVuL ZSLwY2T95UxfSXNb7/5hinh/WAela93IYYp4Hz8onHuNgBoIXLnR1riVBX+06Ukn/MAWtuHkNXhk OrcpMkupfe0yvgCl2ibZssjVAhMHapYCo4dleO04XTk/DlFgdV+7uA9KlRLRRVFggYlL4FqOeliG 1473JW6Z4kN5oF1cgFLtCmh0WGDiEjKCTlyV4bWJlnDUknJfu8Bw3daBRTwwcaDq3mqjDK998PeK 42IV8IZ2gbnz9AVRXAQ8MHEDoGYLjTK89qmL3RgVi3W+r12GAKWqiEWYOhaYuFimz6ONMryTbsIJ kjhahnc62TlahncmZ/LdCT2MErK1BKxRZRw/1qwPXsRfnk6rwHMwOEFrL6+4cIiDYSEXPD84Bf2t cM4F27J0H2/rPVr655rh1IntC4tNZ6KuTwfBsV57TMAGOtSDuFWvUxWmpULbarHXglse2jQ0LxaY tehqJU7BsTJOwAYWfA/i1pAppQn2qqrF1GKv5drvf7kz6MQRLwJOb1cotXfd4acEzN2LuAdxqx6X L7+dmadwrBZ7LbjnkbBDSRGNG+DWKsUyUc4JvKGHiKtTag2zhMJxsdeCl+8RXqTkxrhAN4pWkWJw cZ2ADbwHiKnwBVfisVrsteBFjBoipH9ToFmDG0cNcKzZBwRsYGEXt2V1cKwPcLUMx7jY63T/32hf 6g3sWLBnmlYqoYmgfF29gLL14bZ+9zgRwUWwRgCivy5jHOE36++Aaj07D0s4IyOmP3iP5MZSubqh 1WmOG8/bd/ybhXo2XdNiVhoWeDGPigSvCHuuet70dCYdrqfbd/ybpY9fi69p9H4aFnh05sO7K/xf xZ7kt8wNPQKRwaV0+557y5WP/oAmNeqlwcNSWB5C7wRWZc4Y0yng/DU4qI2Z1MzyHC1D9L0qBgDP z3lFk+nj0rk+Oie9kza8InqmDupUnKTFDDUWazEIZiGkvTFmaJuge0OX6/zE/bJw5+bGuu618qNj RtUdfSZn8j8vVM425+KEygl3X6hIMf0rDv/ejyxYd3h09YXKxa37AgJYCF3JEl/fHlyvdYnLKyoX twWr+mQVwgoivK2U7PYhjqicVbm4wp9E/k8ehBVkyXOo7PYRkgDPEyeKAaxc4kQibnc5+AvyKsNc HODOjeqq5MQuOxABdUeTc8YUw1wcPqpTeQhhhbZZtP1St723CDswcT0l6NiBiTspQdcscQ/Cn5cw 5joJPZEv2EwmznNsplBXrzvqqYoTROeccW7i1qduXnQYhUUIvDqmeiXcMU/sHXDCuDlCJNFNbqcR txRudYXPDItBbprkDtEnGvgHO/SV6X28Q/9a487Ea3pn6TA3f0TyJOTPSIiG43yAUVgQFrH36dcO njEdBy+ELjnilEcBlMG1m6+/9oOpm2vgCM4F+Ihjxk7G4cYNqxunT3jPBAU/mwNwDF8LOzzrn4if yZl83wRriVngETVLbSv0KSd7G1uuCXVOn3qtNeo804QNi30ca4kbOAlyxXpQzIktjaSdyh9rrFHn CfhhYjCoJa6lstskc+ed9YKhPTbA6dh3U9rXBhMpWCGvPzYghtUiqs5zyXhGH84f7I6pWuIom3JS QlpJf9kD+4G7mben9KTFxBTEklucR00IIVWdp4CVf5UdbDBhLTH/SPC/7grwkVJ6msUrUlRuc825 zwR/VSYfP5356O5qyFd1nkur6ajH7h7iRZfLNLdogJfILK/YiJOrHuDWvxALopq5MASzqs7zNuIH UTTWEvMimwIcBy9dGHzlDuCeniwjXhGAF1WJclDnOYd4DHP4JKgl5oswdbA4qfN1v6TVjV/UxC++ 5JpfzNZ49j2SrxuLOHWNOs/Jczxb38ePikoLH1NX3IWotPAxdcVncib/KwQ+gxgOJBo2aj+3Nqx+ pwNDxRrHaRI7mnM7wA9EnaxOE024UPjAUTz6MAfRBPxsprQlkv0a4ghYTxofbOMmxTP8nhNj3Q2O +bNIAtN3Y02bNdFqgSVwc59PwerISUIcAaabD8c8HxMa1ZBpbc1zdQw/WHais6ZsRtR7xRKFnUT+ KYeVIZgrB/GZYboh6EYav2nkvsV4cJymjzB996AFt7AuLmHB4jSPuF0bBccxTF0RYQr3EFfH2Dt1 9Ur5EL8A/x1wyIB1nQeDd8iQM8+GTVdQNke9kFm25rk6Ls8Bbrr6Z8XDZMg5mKiYXYvlH+DSDp9S rOlZ18j4JRExJiNcrw/lXUMdD01GEmjufmydkEvR2X4upTl50pJIOSbZokSr7edSmpMnLYmUpmQL FddEIlC4WVQMTLJhzQAoknKsWASlvoNCq6FqiSN7X1SwFjxoVLh+iKuL6oRHS0yAypUgaH1Rh5/B L/oMbdso1KYzugHuFRpvqu+g0CPT2jZZr6cWWnBwZAl/HJ8YumKKK0z6OicpzyYJqYNjxSIom+B3 UOh0RU+JLVZt2ZmKbgCe393IC6x3mo1IqQ9quwE+cwtaJsQ19R0U+j+t4FbXmNuao3YBt0BJ0ljv NEsBD4OmKZzZc9j4A/UdFLqZUDtlrfgFwAesRdd6C+udrvYDzvV/9H6NG6/s13PYaI/j07K6OQD4 1ri7WmvCz+GeV75cyj/GeqepvpKMGNrnxgJuvBoLS9iY2VRPy9Zjmi/WN90O22rkZFU6kzP5fyQR NFC41RWioPazOjrFhh/E2ACjbyycQ8OlWo8+aqSeCIP/hAXi6qR9N6rr6umwlkfqj5SKUXSjuNUV Hlx/Ql5spjJ9GDWE3ktBZKHXEzk0gKS6aWTOD2br8M4GfnHW1/slDZSng62uMN0aIVf4lNSn0I1W qhBZhMyVgjJ32xBixCR+kxjVcWs+ue8l+9F14lZXnOZvQyjAwdqgG624EFnoE4+cOJo7R2d7lH7w LXR3yb4LccPGfu9ugCfCVPwd4hnEXYWXwL45quYTcEHpgIajlXPgiN0DfC7Y6gpTa0Rc5Vzo+HCi wt2QwsHcbWE1FHXoMqHlIrzbAa7cKG51hY38l2DZeLDzpY8xG15h6iJo7vD5RGpgEBEZWlSO+DhF aLLDh2sY0X7eMdJU9XRYcHIsTkXw3KrSDaY16pUwzzvc8I8qsmE0TQLXqUqhjsMPHoFVx004OcBZ Mx4t3ajjtxKBav1+e+QmaB2WlwzmaqkPlL7d3DZu1mBpN/jsgiHPG6E6GX7SVEUT9X5jeqtKtSqp iq1PSWp9zmSBTQ1T5V5j4O/0rXmajuKWmQbrgZHmZeGGM7Fq76JqfbY7+VLnkl5aG8PV3XAf+txr dOYlueTAtUfvS7oB+PA3M02465hhZ1yAaq2ZZh5r7fiaKXOAa4F7ZXnCFe6tYhgr+Ag7xC+4EJ8W /16Aaq0tjORB62j583EJS8FhExttk+XZqDNP56LlhRiEsYL/0j3Ezxk3xoxFV4Bq2RWeqYPWDTmb Jeg9U1fu1TcytSHbNSZpkZ43wFxkP20rQGoKWqUyLacrJG4KWjMK77aQOKzM2G1cfWHaRD++hq+j BHhY4UHLqfC4ofuedpfcVDsUaNNO1zsPmR4Mvp/gDgXatFPiusI/IrhDgTbt1HgZcFzI5ZVNOx3u hcaL5Lb4tdqhQJt2GpqEDH3T0r4kC6paGG3aqb/m5/Dzf7quG3IYHfSEn8np5b8AK2ZBUXaMTrYA AAAASUVORK5CYII= ------=_NextPart_000_006A_01C6B667.B87C5300-- From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 08 16:13:04 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAXwi-0003ql-Bt; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:13:00 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAXwh-0003qg-6r for iptel@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:12:59 -0400 Received: from zcars04f.nortel.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAXwf-00047D-Q6 for iptel@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:12:59 -0400 Received: from zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com (zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com [47.103.123.71]) by zcars04f.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id k78KCme21156; Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:12:48 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 15:12:31 -0500 Message-ID: <1ECE0EB50388174790F9694F77522CCF0C184EAD@zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com> In-Reply-To: <1b2101c6a37b$53b7fef0$08f65341@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt thread-index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OA= From: "Francois Audet" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d890c9ddd0b0a61e8c597ad30c1c2176 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that everybody agrees but the author... It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it unique because it is in the user part. > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net]=20 > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree=20 > that it should be a URI parameter. =20 >=20 > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. >=20 > Brian >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > To: Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #.=20 > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >=20 > Paul >=20 > Stastny Richard wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > =20 > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > =20 > > e.g.: > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > >=20 > > should read: > > > sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > ser=3Ddialstring > > =20 > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > =20 > > -sta > >=20 > > ________________________________ > >=20 > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > >=20 > >=20 > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > Identifier > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > Pages : 8 > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > =20 > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a=20 > standardized > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter=20 > "user=3Dphone", > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring",=20 > so that one > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as=20 > a 'sip:' or > > 'sips:' URI. > >=20 > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.tx > > t > >=20 > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a=20 > message to=20 > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in=20 > the body of=20 > > the > message.=20 > > You can also visit=20 > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > to change your subscription settings. > >=20 > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the > username > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After=20 > logging in,=20 > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >=20 > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >=20 > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >=20 > > Send a message to: > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > In the body type: > > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > =20 > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before=20 > the "FILE" > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need=20 > "munpack" or > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail > readers > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which=20 > have been split > > up into multiple messages), so check your local=20 > documentation on > > how to manipulate these messages. > > =20 > > =20 > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > Internet-Draft. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >=20 _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 08 16:44:55 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAYRb-0006MG-2U; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:44:55 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAYRZ-0006M1-Vs for iptel@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:44:53 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAYRX-0005T3-HJ for iptel@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:44:53 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAYRO-0000Kp-OT; Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:44:43 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:44:46 -0400 Message-ID: <088a01c6bb2b$7e383b00$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAAUZYMA== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <1ECE0EB50388174790F9694F77522CCF0C184EAD@zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a92270ba83d7ead10c5001bb42ec3221 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org I've already started working on changing the text. The argument that it should look like a tel uri converted to a sip uri was compelling, even if we don't actually do that. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:13 PM > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that everybody > agrees but the > author... > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it unique > because it is > in the user part. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree > > that it should be a URI parameter. > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. > > > > Brian > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > To: Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > Paul > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > e.g.: > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > > > > > should read: > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > ser=dialstring > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > Identifier > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Pages : 8 > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > standardized > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > "user=phone", > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > so that one > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > > a 'sip:' or > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.tx > > > t > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > message to > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > the body of > > > the > > message. > > > You can also visit > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the > > username > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > logging in, > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > In the body type: > > > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > the "FILE" > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > "munpack" or > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail > > readers > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > have been split > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > documentation on > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > > Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 03:36:55 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAicT-00075I-9r; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:36:49 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAicS-00075D-FJ for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:36:48 -0400 Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.60]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAicR-0005Q5-MA for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:36:48 -0400 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id E2D674F0048; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:36:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.174]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:36:46 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:36:46 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:36:45 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12EC@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <1ECE0EB50388174790F9694F77522CCF0C184EAD@zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kA== From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Francois Audet" , "Brian Rosen" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 07:36:46.0558 (UTC) FILETIME=[915F1FE0:01C6BB86] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 612a16ba5c5f570bfc42b3ac5606ac53 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi, Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since = user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri.=20 The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that case the parameter should of be located after the host part. HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about a Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 (similar to user=3Dphone). Regards, Christer =20 -----Original Message----- From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com]=20 Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that everybody agrees but the author... It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it unique because it is in the user part. > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it=20 > should be a URI parameter. >=20 > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. >=20 > Brian >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > To: Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #.=20 > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >=20 > Paul >=20 > Stastny Richard wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > =20 > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > =20 > > e.g.: > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > >=20 > > should read: > > > sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > ser=3Ddialstring > > =20 > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > =20 > > -sta > >=20 > > ________________________________ > >=20 > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > >=20 > >=20 > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > Identifier > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > Pages : 8 > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > =20 > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > standardized > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > "user=3Dphone", > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > so that one > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as > a 'sip:' or > > 'sips:' URI. > >=20 > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.tx > > t > >=20 > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > message to > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > the body of > > the > message.=20 > > You can also visit > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > to change your subscription settings. > >=20 > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the > username > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > logging in, > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >=20 > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >=20 > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >=20 > > Send a message to: > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > In the body type: > > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > =20 > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > the "FILE" > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > "munpack" or > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail > readers > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > have been split > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > documentation on > > how to manipulate these messages. > > =20 > > =20 > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > Internet-Draft. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >=20 _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 08:51:21 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnWh-0002DC-LL; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:51:11 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnWg-0002Cz-5K for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:51:10 -0400 Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnWg-0000QS-2w for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:51:10 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnUi-0003r3-Ph for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:49:13 -0400 Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.120]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 299336E0001; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:49:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.177]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:49:00 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:49:00 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:49:00 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F1@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <094601c6bbb1$1c9414b0$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kAAKuEnwAAA/kwA= From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 12:49:00.0633 (UTC) FILETIME=[2FC01C90:01C6BBB2] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Scan-Signature: 8d89ee9312a95de8ee48d1c94511f1bb Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it should be a new Tel-Uri parameter. E.g. sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta.exa= mpl e.com;user=3Dphone Regards, Christer=20 -----Original Message----- From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net]=20 Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out I was advocating: GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com ;user=3Dphone BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com ;user=3Ddialstring GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com ;user=3Ddialstring I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was right. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since=20 > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required = (as=20 > per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that perspective=20 > there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. >=20 > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that=20 > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >=20 > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about a > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if=20 > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 = > (similar to user=3Dphone). >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Christer >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >=20 > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that=20 > everybody agrees but the author... >=20 > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >=20 > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it=20 > unique because it is in the user part. >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it=20 > > should be a URI parameter. > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. > > > > Brian > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > To: Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > Paul > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > e.g.: > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > > > > > > should read: > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > ser=3Ddialstring > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > Identifier > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Pages : 8 > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > standardized > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > "user=3Dphone", > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > so that one > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as > > a 'sip:' or > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > tx > > > t > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > message to > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > the body of > > > the > > message. > > > You can also visit > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with=20 > > > the > > username > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > logging in, > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > In the body type: > > > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > the "FILE" > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > "munpack" or > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant=20 > > > mail > > readers > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > have been split > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > documentation on > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > > Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 09:06:56 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnlv-0001BI-31; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:06:55 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnlu-0001Ae-Mq for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:06:54 -0400 Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnlu-00018X-Kj for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:06:54 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnis-00044n-Qw for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:03:49 -0400 Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.120]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id DEE346E0001; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:03:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.177]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:03:45 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:03:45 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:03:44 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F2@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <094d01c6bbb3$bdd2d990$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kAAKuEnwAAA/kwAAAFYKEAAAP3Jw From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 13:03:45.0032 (UTC) FILETIME=[3EE4B080:01C6BBB4] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Scan-Signature: a1dc446dc7ac353b90b60743d0e479e3 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi,=20 >Please read the draft. > >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question of whether or not we would extend the tel uri to=20 >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel=20 >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=3Ddialstring. It was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to=20 >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not revisit that issue. > >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that tells you it's not a telephone number and is a=20 >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been converted into a SIP-Uri... Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would=20 > we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the=20 > first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >=20 > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it should > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >=20 > E.g. >=20 > = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta.exa= m > pl > e.com;user=3Dphone >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Christer >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat';=20 > 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with=20 > Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out > I was > advocating: >=20 > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > ;user=3Dphone >=20 > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > ;user=3Ddialstring >=20 > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > ;user=3Ddialstring >=20 > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was=20 > right. >=20 > Brian >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since=20 > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required=20 > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that=20 > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > > > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about > > a >=20 > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if=20 > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in = RFC3966 > > (similar to user=3Dphone). > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that=20 > > everybody agrees but the author... > > > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it=20 > > unique because it is in the user part. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it=20 > > > should be a URI parameter. > > > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > > To: Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02=20 > > > I > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > > > e.g.: > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > > > > > > > > should read: > > > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > > ser=3Ddialstring > > > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 > > > > Internet-Drafts > > > directories. > > > > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > > Identifier > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Pages : 8 > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > > standardized > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > > "user=3Dphone", > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > > so that one > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as > > > a 'sip:' or > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > > tx > > > > t > > > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > > message to > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > > the body of > > > > the > > > message. > > > > You can also visit > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with=20 > > > > the > > > username > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > > logging in, > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > > In the body type: > > > > "FILE > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use > this > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > > the "FILE" > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > > "munpack" or > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant=20 > > > > mail > > > readers > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > > have been split > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > > documentation on > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of=20 > > > > the Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Iptel mailing list > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 09:12:44 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnrY-00053X-3l; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:12:44 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnrW-0004x6-2U for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:12:42 -0400 Received: from mail.oefeg.at ([62.47.121.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnrV-0001OY-4D for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:12:42 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:11:21 +0200 Message-ID: <32755D354E6B65498C3BD9FD496C7D463C50B3@oefeg-s04.oefeg.loc> In-Reply-To: <094d01c6bbb3$bdd2d990$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kAAKuEnwAAA/kwAAAFYKEAAAazWw From: "Stastny Richard" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Paul Kyzivat" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d9ae72af46718088458d214998cc683 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi Brian, You finally convinced me with the argument that the dialstring is an extension to the SIP URI only Your syntax as proposed in the draft is fine with me now: sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com Richard > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:00 PM > To: 'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'; 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > Please read the draft. >=20 > We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question of > whether or not we would extend the tel uri to cover dialstrings, or do > what > this version (and several previous versions) do, which is to NOT allow > dialstrings in a tel uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with > user=3Ddialstring. It was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and = to > restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not revisit that > issue. >=20 > If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that tells > you > it's not a telephone number and is a dialstring, so your suggestion is not > acceptable I think. >=20 > Brian >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would we > > need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the first > > GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > > > > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it should > > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > > > > E.g. > > > > sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta.exa= mpl > > e.com;user=3Dphone > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > > 'Stastny Richard' > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with > > Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out I > > was > > advocating: > > > > GOOD: = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > ;user=3Dphone > > > > BAD: = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > ;user=3Ddialstring > > > > GOOD: = sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > > ;user=3Ddialstring > > > > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was > > right. > > > > Brian > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even = required (as > > > per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that perspective > > > there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > > > > > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that > > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > > > > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about a > > > > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 > > > (similar to user=3Dphone). > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Christer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > > > > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > > > everybody agrees but the author... > > > > > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > > > > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it > > > unique because it is in the user part. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it > > > > should be a URI parameter. > > > > > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. > > > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > > > To: Stastny Richard > > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > > > > > e.g.: > > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > > > > > > > > > > should read: > > > > > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > > > ser=3Ddialstring > > > > > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > > > directories. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > > > Identifier > > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > Pages : 8 > > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > > > standardized > > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > > > "user=3Dphone", > > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > > > so that one > > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as > > > > a 'sip:' or > > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > > > tx > > > > > t > > > > > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > > > message to > > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > > > the body of > > > > > the > > > > message. > > > > > You can also visit > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with > > > > > the > > > > username > > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > > > logging in, > > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > > > In the body type: > > > > > "FILE > > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use > > this > > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > > > the "FILE" > > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > > > "munpack" or > > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant > > > > > mail > > > > readers > > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > > > have been split > > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > > > documentation on > > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > > > > Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > -- > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > -- > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Iptel mailing list > > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Iptel mailing list > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 09:26:00 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAo4K-00031L-Mt; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:25:56 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAo4J-0002ye-Jq for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:25:55 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAo4J-0002jQ-0U for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:25:55 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAo48-0003QK-Cl; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:25:46 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:25:45 -0400 Message-ID: <095301c6bbb7$5524eb50$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kAAKuEnwAAA/kwAAAFYKEAAAP3JwAACXGEA= X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F2@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 73f7847c44628482de9d5f1018acf469 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Aha. I see where I have confused you. The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. It is a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring example, it is a telephone number example. The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone has a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The user=phone and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Hi, > > >Please read the draft. > > > >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question of > whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. It > was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not revisit > that issue. > > > >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > > So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To me > it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been converted > into a SIP-Uri... > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would > > we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the > > first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > > > > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it should > > > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > > > > E.g. > > > > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.exam > > pl > > e.com;user=phone > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > > 'Stastny Richard' > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with > > Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out > > > I was > > advocating: > > > > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > ;user=phone > > > > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > ;user=dialstring > > > > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > ;user=dialstring > > > > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was > > right. > > > > Brian > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required > > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that > > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > > > > > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that > > > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > > > > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about > > > > a > > > > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 > > > > (similar to user=phone). > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Christer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > > > > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > > > everybody agrees but the author... > > > > > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > > > > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it > > > unique because it is in the user part. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it > > > > should be a URI parameter. > > > > > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > another. > > > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > > > To: Stastny Richard > > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 > > > > I > > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > > > > > e.g.: > > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > > > > > > > > > should read: > > > > > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > > > ser=dialstring > > > > > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > > > > > Internet-Drafts > > > > directories. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > > > Identifier > > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > Pages : 8 > > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a > dial > > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > > > standardized > > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > > > "user=phone", > > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This > memo > > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > > > so that one > > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > > > > a 'sip:' or > > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > > > tx > > > > > t > > > > > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > > > message to > > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > > > the body of > > > > > the > > > > message. > > > > > You can also visit > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with > > > > > the > > > > username > > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > > > logging in, > > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > > > In the body type: > > > > > "FILE > > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use > > this > > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > > > the "FILE" > > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > > > "munpack" or > > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant > > > > > mail > > > > readers > > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > > > have been split > > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > > > documentation on > > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of > > > > > the Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Iptel mailing list > > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Iptel mailing list > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:12:17 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GApj9-0002z4-Vo; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:12:11 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GApj9-0002yy-1S for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:12:11 -0400 Received: from host10.216.41.24.conversent.net ([216.41.24.10] helo=acmepacket.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GApj8-0004sI-Dh for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:12:11 -0400 Received: from BPenfield [10.0.200.6] by acmepacket.com with ESMTP (SMTPD-9.03) id AB51047C; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:12:17 -0400 Message-ID: <002a01c6bbc6$2cdd7ef0$800101df@acmepacket.com> From: "Bob Penfield" To: "Brian Rosen" , "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" References: <095301c6bbb7$5524eb50$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:12:05 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cd3d702b63698072ba67a75ce9e0fc9e Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Brian, I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? In summary, I see two options: 1) 2) I personally prefer option #1. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" ; "'Stastny Richard'" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. It > is > a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context parameter as > described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring example, it is a > telephone number example. > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone has a > phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The user=phone > and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > 'wrong', > even if the ABNF made it right. > > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >Please read the draft. >> > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question of >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. It >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not revisit >> that issue. >> > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. >> >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To me >> it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been converted >> into a SIP-Uri... >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would >> > we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the >> > first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >> > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it should >> >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >> > >> > E.g. >> > >> > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.exam >> > pl >> > e.com;user=phone >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Christer >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; >> > 'Stastny Richard' >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with >> > Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out >> >> > I was >> > advocating: >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=phone >> > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=dialstring >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=dialstring >> > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was >> > right. >> > >> > Brian >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. >> > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that >> >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >> > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about >> >> > > a >> > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 >> >> > > (similar to user=phone). >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > >> > > Christer >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >> > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that >> > > everybody agrees but the author... >> > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >> > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it >> > > unique because it is in the user part. >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it >> > > > should be a URI parameter. >> > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or >> another. >> > > > >> > > > Brian >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM >> > > > To: Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 >> > > > I >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >> > > > >> > > > Paul >> > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: >> > > > > Hi Brian, >> > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: >> > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com >> > > > > >> > > > > should read: >> > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u >> > > > ser=dialstring >> > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI >> > > > > >> > > > > -sta >> > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ >> > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >> > > > > Internet-Drafts >> > > > directories. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource >> > > > > Identifier >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > Pages : 8 >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a >> dial >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a >> > > > standardized >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter >> > > > "user=phone", >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This >> memo >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", >> > > > so that one >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as >> > > > a 'sip:' or >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. >> > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> > > > > >> > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. >> > > > tx >> > > > > t >> > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >> > > > message to >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >> > > > the body of >> > > > > the >> > > > message. >> > > > > You can also visit >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with >> > > > > the >> > > > username >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >> > > > logging in, >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >> > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. >> > > > > In the body type: >> > > > > "FILE >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use >> > this >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before >> > > > the "FILE" >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need >> > > > "munpack" or >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant >> > > > > mail >> > > > readers >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which >> > > > have been split >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local >> > > > documentation on >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Iptel mailing list >> > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:22:51 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAptS-0007Tb-Cl; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:22:50 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAptQ-0007TW-EP for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:22:48 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAptP-0006Cq-Nb for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:22:48 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GApsr-0003sq-8k; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 10:22:16 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Bob Penfield'" , "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:22:15 -0400 Message-ID: <097b01c6bbc7$9be59c00$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Aca7xj5QjsjV/WKKROqGlxJ6dfqYoQAAPsjQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <002a01c6bbc6$2cdd7ef0$800101df@acmepacket.com> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 213cf0777a99c4ccdd94bb20659dd28c Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org I am agreeing with option #1 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:12 AM > To: Brian Rosen; 'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'; 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > Brian, > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone number, > then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This makes sense > to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP URI contains a > tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes sense to me > that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo contains all the > information > about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is the case, then > phone-context belongs in the user part. > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI parameter, > I > would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. dial-context) so that its > not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. But that still leaves the > question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI parameter mean when > user-dialstring is no present? > > In summary, I see two options: > > 1) > > 2) > > I personally prefer option #1. > > cheers, > (-:bob > > Robert F. Penfield > Chief Software Architect > Acme Packet, Inc. > 71 Third Avenue > Burlington, MA 01803 > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Rosen" > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > It > > is > > a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context parameter as > > described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring example, it is a > > telephone number example. > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone has a > > phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The > user=phone > > and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > > 'wrong', > > even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> >Please read the draft. > >> > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question of > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. It > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not revisit > >> that issue. > >> > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > >> > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To > me > >> it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been converted > >> into a SIP-Uri... > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Christer > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would > >> > we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the > >> > first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > >> > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > should > >> > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > >> > > >> > E.g. > >> > > >> > sip:1234;phone- > context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.exam > >> > pl > >> > e.com;user=phone > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Christer > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with > >> > Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed > out > >> > >> > I was > >> > advocating: > >> > > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=phone > >> > > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=dialstring > >> > > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=dialstring > >> > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was > >> > right. > >> > > >> > Brian > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required > >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that > >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > >> > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > that > >> > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > >> > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk > about > >> > >> > > a > >> > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > RFC3966 > >> > >> > > (similar to user=phone). > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > > >> > > Christer > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > >> > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > >> > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it > >> > > unique because it is in the user part. > >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it > >> > > > should be a URI parameter. > >> > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > >> another. > >> > > > > >> > > > Brian > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 > >> > > > I > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > >> > > > > >> > > > Paul > >> > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > >> > > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > >> > > > ser=dialstring > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > >> > > > directories. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > >> > > > > Identifier > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a > >> dial > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > >> > > > standardized > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > >> > > > "user=phone", > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This > >> memo > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > >> > > > so that one > >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > >> > > > tx > >> > > > > t > >> > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > >> > > > message to > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > >> > > > the body of > >> > > > > the > >> > > > message. > >> > > > > You can also visit > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with > >> > > > > the > >> > > > username > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > >> > > > logging in, > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > >> > > > > In the body type: > >> > > > > "FILE > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use > >> > this > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > >> > > > the "FILE" > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > >> > > > "munpack" or > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant > >> > > > > mail > >> > > > readers > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > with > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > >> > > > have been split > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > >> > > > documentation on > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > reader > >> > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of > >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > - > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > - > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:27:30 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GApxx-0003XI-Om; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:27:29 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GApxw-0003XD-GV for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:27:28 -0400 Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.60]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GApxu-0006x5-Eb for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:27:28 -0400 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id BE99C4F0047; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:27:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.174]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:27:24 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:27:24 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:27:23 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F5@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <097b01c6bbc7$9be59c00$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca7xj5QjsjV/WKKROqGlxJ6dfqYoQAAPsjQAAA3LkA= From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Bob Penfield" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 15:27:24.0576 (UTC) FILETIME=[508ABA00:01C6BBC8] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1e47b908cbd1247f22e7953a41f1c4c6 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi, Would it be possible to use dial-context also in option #1? Because, if phone-context as a SIP-URI parameter confuses with Tel-Uri, doesn't it also confuses with Tel-Uri even more if it's part of the user part? Regards, Christer=20 -----Original Message----- From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net]=20 Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:22 To: 'Bob Penfield'; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt I am agreeing with option #1 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:12 AM > To: Brian Rosen; 'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'; 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > Brian, >=20 > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. >=20 > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone=20 > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > makes sense to me because 'user=3Dphone' means the userinfo of the SIP = > URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also=20 > makes sense to me that 'user=3Ddialstring' means that the userinfo=20 > contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a=20 > tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user=20 > part. >=20 > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI=20 > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g.=20 > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context=20 > SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? >=20 > In summary, I see two options: >=20 > 1) = >=20 > 2) >=20 > I personally prefer option #1. >=20 > cheers, > (-:bob >=20 > Robert F. Penfield > Chief Software Architect > Acme Packet, Inc. > 71 Third Avenue > Burlington, MA 01803 > bpenfield@acmepacket.com >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Rosen" > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ;=20 > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 >=20 > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > It > > is > > a correctly formed user=3Dphone, copying the phone-context parameter = > > as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring example, it > > is a telephone number example. > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=3Dphone = > > has a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show=20 > > the same phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=3Ddialstring. = =20 > > The > user=3Dphone > > and user=3Ddialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look=20 > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> >Please read the draft. > >> > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the=20 > >> >question of > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with = user=3Ddialstring. > >> >It > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not=20 > >> >revisit > >> that issue. > >> > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > >> > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string?=20 > >> To > me > >> it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been=20 > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Christer > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why=20 > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter?=20 > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > >> > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > should > >> > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > >> > > >> > E.g. > >> > > >> > sip:1234;phone- > context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta.exam > >> > pl > >> > e.com;user=3Dphone > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Christer > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange=20 > >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he=20 > >> > pointed > out > >> > >> > I was > >> > advocating: > >> > > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=3Dphone > >> > > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=3Ddialstring > >> > > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=3Ddialstring > >> > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he=20 > >> > was right. > >> > > >> > Brian > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since=20 > >> > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even=20 > >> > > required (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from=20 > >> > > that perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > >> > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > that > >> > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > >> > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk > about > >> > >> > > a > >> > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if=20 > >> > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > RFC3966 > >> > >> > > (similar to user=3Dphone). > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > > >> > > Christer > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that=20 > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > >> > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > >> > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes=20 > >> > > it unique because it is in the user part. > >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree=20 > >> > > > that it should be a URI parameter. > >> > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > >> another. > >> > > > > >> > > > Brian > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the > >> > > > -02 I > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > >> > > > > >> > > > Paul > >> > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > >> > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > >> > > > > > >> > > > = sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com; > >> > > > u > >> > > > ser=3Ddialstring > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip=20 > >> > > > > URI > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org=20 > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > >> > > > directories. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > >> > > > > Identifier > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent > >> > > > > a > >> dial > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > >> > > > standardized > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > >> > > > "user=3Dphone", > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. =20 > >> > > > > This > >> memo > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > >> > > > so that one > >> > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string = as > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > >> > > > tx > >> > > > > t > >> > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > >> > > > message to > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > >> > > > the body of > >> > > > > the > >> > > > message. > >> > > > > You can also visit > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login=20 > >> > > > > with the > >> > > > username > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > >> > > > logging in, > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > >> > > > > In the body type: > >> > > > > "FILE > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To > >> > > > > use > >> > this > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > >> > > > the "FILE" > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > >> > > > "munpack" or > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different=20 > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > >> > > > readers > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > with > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > >> > > > have been split > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > >> > > > documentation on > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > reader > >> > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version=20 > >> > > > > of the Internet-Draft. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > ---- > - > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > ---- > - > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:33:28 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAq3j-00067J-N5; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:27 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAq3i-00066b-8H for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:26 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAq3h-0007eY-Ga for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:26 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAq3P-0004eA-CP; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 10:33:08 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Bob Penfield'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:33:09 -0400 Message-ID: <098201c6bbc9$20c7bf60$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Aca7xj5QjsjV/WKKROqGlxJ6dfqYoQAAPsjQAAA3LkAAAC5YoA== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F5@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c8d1e86bb8f49de8156b6392faa4a63b Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Well, if we have consensus to change the name of the parameter, I don't have a problem in doing that, although I don't see a real need to do that. If you want to ADD the possibility of another parameter that would appear after the host part, then I would not want to do that. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:27 AM > To: Brian Rosen; Bob Penfield; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny > Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Hi, > > Would it be possible to use dial-context also in option #1? > > Because, if phone-context as a SIP-URI parameter confuses with Tel-Uri, > doesn't it also confuses with Tel-Uri even more if it's part of the user > part? > > Regards, > > Christer > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:22 > To: 'Bob Penfield'; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > I am agreeing with option #1 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:12 AM > > To: Brian Rosen; 'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'; 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > > > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Brian, > > > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone > > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > > > makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP > > URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also > > makes sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo > > contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a > > tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user > > part. > > > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI > > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > > > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context > > SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? > > > > In summary, I see two options: > > > > 1) > > > > 2) > > > > I personally prefer option #1. > > > > cheers, > > (-:bob > > > > Robert F. Penfield > > Chief Software Architect > > Acme Packet, Inc. > > 71 Third Avenue > > Burlington, MA 01803 > > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Rosen" > > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip > uri. > > It > > > is > > > a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context parameter > > > as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring example, it > > > > is a telephone number example. > > > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone > > > has a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show > > > the same phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. > > > The > > user=phone > > > and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> >Please read the draft. > > >> > > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the > > >> >question of > > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. > > > >> >It > > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not > > >> >revisit > > >> that issue. > > >> > > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > > >> > > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? > > >> To > > me > > >> it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been > > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Christer > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why > > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? > > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > > >> > > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > > should > > >> > > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > > >> > > > >> > E.g. > > >> > > > >> > sip:1234;phone- > > context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.exam > > >> > pl > > >> > e.com;user=phone > > >> > > > >> > Regards, > > >> > > > >> > Christer > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > > > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange > > >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he > > >> > pointed > > out > > >> > > >> > I was > > >> > advocating: > > >> > > > >> > GOOD: > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=phone > > >> > > > >> > BAD: > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=dialstring > > >> > > > >> > GOOD: > sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=dialstring > > >> > > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he > > >> > was right. > > >> > > > >> > Brian > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > > >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even > > >> > > required (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from > > >> > > that perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with > Tel-Uri. > > >> > > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > > that > > >> > > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > >> > > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk > > about > > >> > > >> > > a > > >> > > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > > >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > > RFC3966 > > >> > > >> > > (similar to user=phone). > > >> > > > > >> > > Regards, > > >> > > > > >> > > Christer > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > >> > > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > > >> > > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > >> > > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes > > >> > > it unique because it is in the user part. > > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree > > >> > > > that it should be a URI parameter. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > > >> another. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Brian > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the > > > >> > > > -02 I > > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Paul > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > > >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com; > > >> > > > u > > >> > > > ser=dialstring > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip > > >> > > > > URI > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > > >> > > > directories. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the > Session > > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform > Resource > > >> > > > > Identifier > > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > >> > > > > Filename : > draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent > > > >> > > > > a > > >> dial > > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > >> > > > standardized > > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > >> > > > "user=phone", > > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. > > >> > > > > This > > >> memo > > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > >> > > > so that one > > >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > >> > > > tx > > >> > > > > t > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > >> > > > message to > > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > >> > > > the body of > > >> > > > > the > > >> > > > message. > > >> > > > > You can also visit > > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login > > >> > > > > with the > > >> > > > username > > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > >> > > > logging in, > > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > >> > > > > In the body type: > > >> > > > > "FILE > > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document > in > > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To > > > >> > > > > use > > >> > this > > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > >> > > > the "FILE" > > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > >> > > > "munpack" or > > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different > > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > > >> > > > readers > > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > > with > > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > >> > > > have been split > > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > >> > > > documentation on > > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > > reader > > >> > > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version > > >> > > > > of the Internet-Draft. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > ---- > > - > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > ---- > > - > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:33:47 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAq43-0006Rg-Bh; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:47 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAq41-0006RV-7V for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:45 -0400 Received: from host10.216.41.24.conversent.net ([216.41.24.10] helo=acmepacket.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAq40-0007fs-FY for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:45 -0400 Received: from BPenfield [10.0.200.6] by acmepacket.com with ESMTP (SMTPD-9.03) id A0610224; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:33:53 -0400 Message-ID: <007301c6bbc9$3152fa20$800101df@acmepacket.com> From: "Bob Penfield" To: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" , "Brian Rosen" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" References: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F5@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:33:41 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c8611c7316981838cbe4195d07ac7fdb Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org I think that using 'dial-context' instead of 'phone-context' is probably a good idea to prevent confusion. However, I would still be OK with phone-context as long as it was in the user part (option#1) because it essentially has the same meaning as it does with a tel-URI. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)" To: "Brian Rosen" ; "Bob Penfield" ; "Francois Audet" ; "Paul Kyzivat" ; "Stastny Richard" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:27 AM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Hi, Would it be possible to use dial-context also in option #1? Because, if phone-context as a SIP-URI parameter confuses with Tel-Uri, doesn't it also confuses with Tel-Uri even more if it's part of the user part? Regards, Christer -----Original Message----- From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:22 To: 'Bob Penfield'; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt I am agreeing with option #1 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:12 AM > To: Brian Rosen; 'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'; 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > Brian, > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP > URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also > makes sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo > contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a > tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user > part. > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context > SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? > > In summary, I see two options: > > 1) > > 2) > > I personally prefer option #1. > > cheers, > (-:bob > > Robert F. Penfield > Chief Software Architect > Acme Packet, Inc. > 71 Third Avenue > Burlington, MA 01803 > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Rosen" > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > It > > is > > a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context parameter > > as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring example, it > > is a telephone number example. > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone > > has a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show > > the same phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. > > The > user=phone > > and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> >Please read the draft. > >> > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the > >> >question of > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. > >> >It > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not > >> >revisit > >> that issue. > >> > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > >> > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? > >> To > me > >> it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Christer > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > >> > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > should > >> > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > >> > > >> > E.g. > >> > > >> > sip:1234;phone- > context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.exam > >> > pl > >> > e.com;user=phone > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Christer > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange > >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he > >> > pointed > out > >> > >> > I was > >> > advocating: > >> > > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=phone > >> > > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=dialstring > >> > > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=dialstring > >> > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he > >> > was right. > >> > > >> > Brian > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even > >> > > required (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from > >> > > that perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > >> > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > that > >> > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > >> > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk > about > >> > >> > > a > >> > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > RFC3966 > >> > >> > > (similar to user=phone). > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > > >> > > Christer > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > >> > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > >> > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes > >> > > it unique because it is in the user part. > >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree > >> > > > that it should be a URI parameter. > >> > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > >> another. > >> > > > > >> > > > Brian > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the > >> > > > -02 I > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > >> > > > > >> > > > Paul > >> > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > >> > > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com; > >> > > > u > >> > > > ser=dialstring > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip > >> > > > > URI > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > >> > > > directories. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > >> > > > > Identifier > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent > >> > > > > a > >> dial > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > >> > > > standardized > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > >> > > > "user=phone", > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. > >> > > > > This > >> memo > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > >> > > > so that one > >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > >> > > > tx > >> > > > > t > >> > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > >> > > > message to > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > >> > > > the body of > >> > > > > the > >> > > > message. > >> > > > > You can also visit > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login > >> > > > > with the > >> > > > username > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > >> > > > logging in, > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > >> > > > > In the body type: > >> > > > > "FILE > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To > >> > > > > use > >> > this > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > >> > > > the "FILE" > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > >> > > > "munpack" or > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > >> > > > readers > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > with > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > >> > > > have been split > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > >> > > > documentation on > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > reader > >> > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version > >> > > > > of the Internet-Draft. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > ---- > - > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > ---- > - > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:43:22 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAqDA-0004VM-Ga; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:43:12 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAqD9-0004VG-Vm for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:43:11 -0400 Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnlw-00018X-Kt for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:06:56 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnfS-00041G-N9 for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 09:00:17 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAnfH-0001EF-15; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:00:04 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:00:04 -0400 Message-ID: <094d01c6bbb3$bdd2d990$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kAAKuEnwAAA/kwAAAFYKEA== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12F1@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-Scan-Signature: 2d133cc328f58695161c98bb4f4dc213 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Please read the draft. We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question of whether or not we would extend the tel uri to cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. It was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not revisit that issue. If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that tells you it's not a telephone number and is a dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Hi, > > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why would we > need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? Also, the first > GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it should > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > > E.g. > > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.exampl > e.com;user=phone > > Regards, > > Christer > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with > Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out I > was > advocating: > > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > ;user=phone > > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > ;user=dialstring > > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > ;user=dialstring > > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was > right. > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required (as > > per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that perspective > > there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > > > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about a > > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 > > (similar to user=phone). > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > > everybody agrees but the author... > > > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it > > unique because it is in the user part. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it > > > should be a URI parameter. > > > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > > To: Stastny Richard > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > > > e.g.: > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > > > > > > > should read: > > > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > > ser=dialstring > > > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > > directories. > > > > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > > Identifier > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Pages : 8 > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > > standardized > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > > "user=phone", > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > > so that one > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > > > a 'sip:' or > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > > tx > > > > t > > > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > > message to > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > > the body of > > > > the > > > message. > > > > You can also visit > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with > > > > the > > > username > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > > logging in, > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > > In the body type: > > > > "FILE > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use > this > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > > the "FILE" > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > > "munpack" or > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant > > > > mail > > > readers > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > > have been split > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > > documentation on > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > > > Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Iptel mailing list > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 11:50:30 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAqK4-00089n-Bq; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:50:20 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAqK2-00089c-Vy for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:50:18 -0400 Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnWh-0000QS-EX for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:51:11 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAnNI-0003jU-Vj for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:41:31 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAnN3-0008Fz-Ld; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 07:41:15 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 08:41:14 -0400 Message-ID: <094601c6bbb1$1c9414b0$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcageNBHysirBagFSoCrxn9dk5YxNADAnHDQBerA2OAAF927kAAKuEnw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12EC@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-Scan-Signature: 325b777e1a3a618c889460b612a65510 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he pointed out I was advocating: GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com ;user=phone BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com ;user=dialstring GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com ;user=dialstring I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was right. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Hi, > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since user=phone > is not used, the user part syntax is not even required (as per RFC3261) > to be according to RFC3966. So, from that perspective there is no > requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in that > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk about a > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in RFC3966 > (similar to user=phone). > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that everybody > agrees but the author... > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it unique > because it is in the user part. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that it > > should be a URI parameter. > > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or another. > > > > Brian > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > To: Stastny Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the -02 I > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > > > Paul > > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > > Hi Brian, > > > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > > > > > e.g.: > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > > > > > should read: > > > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > > ser=dialstring > > > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip URI > > > > > > -sta > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > > > > > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource > > > Identifier > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Pages : 8 > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a dial > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > standardized > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > "user=phone", > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This memo > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > so that one > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > > a 'sip:' or > > > 'sips:' URI. > > > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.tx > > > t > > > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > message to > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > the body of > > > the > > message. > > > You can also visit > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > to change your subscription settings. > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the > > username > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > logging in, > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > > > > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > > > > > Send a message to: > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > In the body type: > > > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > the "FILE" > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > "munpack" or > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail > > readers > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > have been split > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > documentation on > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > > > > > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > > Internet-Draft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 15:49:22 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAu3F-0005dj-6L; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:49:13 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAu3E-0005dd-BK for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:49:12 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAu3D-0003Rr-3m for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:49:12 -0400 Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.120]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 6BCC88E0001; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 21:49:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.171]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 21:49:10 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 21:49:09 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 21:49:08 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12FF@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <002a01c6bbc6$2cdd7ef0$800101df@acmepacket.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca7xjkVVxfH3o8SQ4aEezdecwchLAAJXw6g From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Bob Penfield" , "Brian Rosen" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 19:49:09.0861 (UTC) FILETIME=[E19F0950:01C6BBEC] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1e47b908cbd1247f22e7953a41f1c4c6 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi, There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax perspective. RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. RFC3261 does say that, if user=3Dphone, the userpart shall be parsed as = a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). Now, if user=3Ddialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of userpart. One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if user=3Ddialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI must be unique, but that's a separate thing. I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. Regards, Christer =20 -----Original Message----- From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com]=20 Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Brian, I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This makes sense to me because 'user=3Dphone' means the userinfo of the SIP = URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes sense to me that 'user=3Ddialstring' means that the userinfo contains = all the information about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? In summary, I see two options: 1) 2) I personally prefer option #1. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'"=20 ; "'Stastny Richard'" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > It is a correctly formed user=3Dphone, copying the phone-context=20 > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring=20 > example, it is a telephone number example. > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=3Dphone = has > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=3Ddialstring. The=20 > user=3Dphone and user=3Ddialstring parameters should look the same. > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look=20 > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >Please read the draft. >> > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question=20 >> >of >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=3Ddialstring. = >> >It >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not=20 >> >revisit >> that issue. >> > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. >> >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been=20 >> converted into a SIP-Uri... >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why=20 >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter?=20 >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >> > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it=20 >> > should >> >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >> > >> > E.g. >> > >> > = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta.e >> > xam >> > pl >> > e.com;user=3Dphone >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Christer >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat';=20 >> > 'Stastny Richard' >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange=20 >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he=20 >> > pointed out >> >> > I was >> > advocating: >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=3Dphone >> > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=3Ddialstring >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com >> > ;user=3Ddialstring >> > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was >> > right. >> > >> > Brian >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since=20 >> > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even = required >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that=20 >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. >> > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in=20 >> > > that >> >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >> > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk=20 >> > > about >> >> > > a >> > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if=20 >> > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in=20 >> > > RFC3966 >> >> > > (similar to user=3Dphone). >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > >> > > Christer >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >> > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that=20 >> > > everybody agrees but the author... >> > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >> > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it >> > > unique because it is in the user part. >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that=20 >> > > > it should be a URI parameter. >> > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or >> another. >> > > > >> > > > Brian >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM >> > > > To: Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the=20 >> > > > -02 I >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >> > > > >> > > > Paul >> > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: >> > > > > Hi Brian, >> > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: >> > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; >> > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com >> > > > > >> > > > > should read: >> > > > > >> > > > = sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u >> > > > ser=3Ddialstring >> > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip=20 >> > > > > URI >> > > > > >> > > > > -sta >> > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ >> > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org=20 >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 >> > > > > Internet-Drafts >> > > > directories. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource >> > > > > Identifier >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > Pages : 8 >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a >> dial >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a >> > > > standardized >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter >> > > > "user=3Dphone", >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This >> memo >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", >> > > > so that one >> > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as >> > > > a 'sip:' or >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. >> > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> > > > > >> > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. >> > > > tx >> > > > > t >> > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >> > > > message to >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >> > > > the body of >> > > > > the >> > > > message. >> > > > > You can also visit >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login=20 >> > > > > with the >> > > > username >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >> > > > logging in, >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >> > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. >> > > > > In the body type: >> > > > > "FILE >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To=20 >> > > > > use >> > this >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before >> > > > the "FILE" >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need >> > > > "munpack" or >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different=20 >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail >> > > > readers >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which >> > > > have been split >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local >> > > > documentation on >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail=20 >> > > > > reader >> >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > --- >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > --- >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Iptel mailing list >> > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >=20 _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 16:15:27 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAuSc-0000nq-M7; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:15:26 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAuSb-0000mW-JR for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:15:25 -0400 Received: from host10.216.41.24.conversent.net ([216.41.24.10] helo=acmepacket.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAuSa-0002EG-OS for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:15:25 -0400 Received: from BPenfield [10.0.200.6] by acmepacket.com with ESMTP (SMTPD-9.03) id A2360110; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:14:46 -0400 Message-ID: <019d01c6bbf0$7741e470$800101df@acmepacket.com> From: "Bob Penfield" To: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" , "Brian Rosen" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" References: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12FF@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 16:14:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ceb20e3ccfd90d068e2ad6c8a4781b53 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org According to RFC3261, the userinfo can contain: user = 1*( unreserved / escaped / user-unreserved ) user-unreserved = "&" / "=" / "+" / "$" / "," / ";" / "?" / "/" unreserved = alphanum / mark mark = "-" / "_" / "." / "!" / "~" / "*" / "'" / "(" / ")" All the characters in the dialstring parameters are legal in userinfo. Only devices supporting user=dialstring need to understand that everything after the ";" are dialstring parameters. To all other devices, its an opaque user string. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)" To: "Bob Penfield" ; "Brian Rosen" ; "Francois Audet" ; "Paul Kyzivat" ; "Stastny Richard" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Hi, There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax perspective. RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of userpart. One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if user=dialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI must be unique, but that's a separate thing. I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. Regards, Christer -----Original Message----- From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Brian, I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? In summary, I see two options: 1) 2) I personally prefer option #1. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" ; "'Stastny Richard'" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > It is a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring > example, it is a telephone number example. > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone has > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The > user=phone and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >Please read the draft. >> > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question >> >of >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. >> >It >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not >> >revisit >> that issue. >> > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. >> >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been >> converted into a SIP-Uri... >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >> > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it >> > should >> >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >> > >> > E.g. >> > >> > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.e >> > xam >> > pl >> > e.com;user=phone >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Christer >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; >> > 'Stastny Richard' >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he >> > pointed out >> >> > I was >> > advocating: >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=phone >> > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=dialstring >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=dialstring >> > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was >> > right. >> > >> > Brian >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. >> > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in >> > > that >> >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >> > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk >> > > about >> >> > > a >> > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in >> > > RFC3966 >> >> > > (similar to user=phone). >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > >> > > Christer >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >> > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that >> > > everybody agrees but the author... >> > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >> > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it >> > > unique because it is in the user part. >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that >> > > > it should be a URI parameter. >> > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or >> another. >> > > > >> > > > Brian >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM >> > > > To: Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the >> > > > -02 I >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >> > > > >> > > > Paul >> > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: >> > > > > Hi Brian, >> > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: >> > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com >> > > > > >> > > > > should read: >> > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u >> > > > ser=dialstring >> > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip >> > > > > URI >> > > > > >> > > > > -sta >> > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ >> > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >> > > > > Internet-Drafts >> > > > directories. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource >> > > > > Identifier >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > Pages : 8 >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a >> dial >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a >> > > > standardized >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter >> > > > "user=phone", >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This >> memo >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", >> > > > so that one >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as >> > > > a 'sip:' or >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. >> > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> > > > > >> > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. >> > > > tx >> > > > > t >> > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >> > > > message to >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >> > > > the body of >> > > > > the >> > > > message. >> > > > > You can also visit >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login >> > > > > with the >> > > > username >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >> > > > logging in, >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >> > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. >> > > > > In the body type: >> > > > > "FILE >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To >> > > > > use >> > this >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before >> > > > the "FILE" >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need >> > > > "munpack" or >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail >> > > > readers >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which >> > > > have been split >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local >> > > > documentation on >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail >> > > > > reader >> >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > --- >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > --- >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Iptel mailing list >> > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 16:53:53 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv3o-0006NY-SU; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:53:52 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv3n-0006NT-Tc for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:53:51 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv3n-0002RI-61 for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:53:51 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAv3P-0006B2-EC; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:53:30 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Bob Penfield'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 16:53:31 -0400 Message-ID: <0a1801c6bbf5$e2b719f0$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Aca7xjkVVxfH3o8SQ4aEezdecwchLAAJXw6gAAJ5xcA= X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12FF@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 426dd6ea860196690cb99367d860d19e Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Since the tel uri RFC describes how you create a SIP URI that includes the phone-context in the userpart, we can either copy or reference that text. The ABNF for the userpart allows the ";" and "=" characters, so there is no syntax problem. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM > To: Bob Penfield; Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny > Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Hi, > > There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax > perspective. > > RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. > > RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as a > TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). > > Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a > SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. So, > I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of > userpart. > > One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if > user=dialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a > DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. > > So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. > > I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I > don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI > must be unique, but that's a separate thing. > > I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best > option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the > decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 > To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > Brian, > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP URI > contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes > sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo contains all > the information about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is > the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI > parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? > > In summary, I see two options: > > 1) > > 2) > > I personally prefer option #1. > > cheers, > (-:bob > > Robert F. Penfield > Chief Software Architect > Acme Packet, Inc. > 71 Third Avenue > Burlington, MA 01803 > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Rosen" > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > > > It is a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context > > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring > > example, it is a telephone number example. > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone has > > > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > > > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The > > user=phone and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> >Please read the draft. > >> > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question > >> >of > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. > >> >It > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not > >> >revisit > >> that issue. > >> > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > >> > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To > > >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Christer > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > >> > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > >> > should > >> > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > >> > > >> > E.g. > >> > > >> > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.e > >> > xam > >> > pl > >> > e.com;user=phone > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Christer > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange > >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he > >> > pointed out > >> > >> > I was > >> > advocating: > >> > > >> > GOOD: > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=phone > >> > > >> > BAD: > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=dialstring > >> > > >> > GOOD: > sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=dialstring > >> > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was > > >> > right. > >> > > >> > Brian > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required > > >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that > >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with > Tel-Uri. > >> > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > >> > > that > >> > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > >> > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk > >> > > about > >> > >> > > a > >> > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > >> > > RFC3966 > >> > >> > > (similar to user=phone). > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > > >> > > Christer > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > >> > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > >> > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it > > >> > > unique because it is in the user part. > >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that > >> > > > it should be a URI parameter. > >> > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > >> another. > >> > > > > >> > > > Brian > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the > >> > > > -02 I > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > >> > > > > >> > > > Paul > >> > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > >> > > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u > >> > > > ser=dialstring > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip > >> > > > > URI > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > >> > > > directories. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the > Session > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform > Resource > >> > > > > Identifier > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a > >> dial > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > >> > > > standardized > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > >> > > > "user=phone", > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This > >> memo > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > >> > > > so that one > >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > >> > > > tx > >> > > > > t > >> > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > >> > > > message to > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > >> > > > the body of > >> > > > > the > >> > > > message. > >> > > > > You can also visit > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login > >> > > > > with the > >> > > > username > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > >> > > > logging in, > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > >> > > > > In the body type: > >> > > > > "FILE > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document > in > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To > >> > > > > use > >> > this > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > >> > > > the "FILE" > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > >> > > > "munpack" or > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > >> > > > readers > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > with > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > >> > > > have been split > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > >> > > > documentation on > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > >> > > > > reader > >> > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of > > >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > --- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > --- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 16:54:56 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv4p-00071s-Ss; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:54:55 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv4o-00071c-1P for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:54:54 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv4m-0002Yo-Ko for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:54:54 -0400 Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.120]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id ECD516E0001; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:54:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.171]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:54:51 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:54:51 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:54:50 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F1303@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <019d01c6bbf0$7741e470$800101df@acmepacket.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca78JKuT/PLpoPMRNabnzynBGl7tgABSYBA From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Bob Penfield" , "Brian Rosen" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 20:54:51.0176 (UTC) FILETIME=[0ED3FA80:01C6BBF6] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 5d99cba2a085c3987933aa34e30e85ab Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi, The issue is not the actual characters, but the fact that you split the userpart into parameters. I don't think there ever was an intention to have parameters in the userpart of the SIP-URI. Again, the only reason we have them in the user=3Dphone case is because the userpart follows = the TEL-URI syntax. Regards, Christer=20 -----Original Message----- From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com]=20 Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 23:15 To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt According to RFC3261, the userinfo can contain: user =3D 1*( unreserved / escaped / user-unreserved ) user-unreserved =3D "&" / "=3D" / "+" / "$" / "," / ";" / "?" / "/" unreserved =3D alphanum / mark mark =3D "-" / "_" / "." / "!" / "~" / "*" / "'" / "(" / ")" All the characters in the dialstring parameters are legal in userinfo. Only devices supporting user=3Ddialstring need to understand that everything after the ";" are dialstring parameters. To all other devices, its an opaque user string. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)" To: "Bob Penfield" ; "Brian Rosen"=20 ; "Francois Audet" ; "Paul Kyzivat" ; "Stastny Richard" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Hi, There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax perspective. RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. RFC3261 does say that, if user=3Dphone, the userpart shall be parsed as = a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). Now, if user=3Ddialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of userpart. One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if user=3Ddialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI must be unique, but that's a separate thing. I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. Regards, Christer -----Original Message----- From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Brian, I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This makes sense to me because 'user=3Dphone' means the userinfo of the SIP = URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes sense to me that 'user=3Ddialstring' means that the userinfo contains = all the information about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? In summary, I see two options: 1) 2) I personally prefer option #1. cheers, (-:bob Robert F. Penfield Chief Software Architect Acme Packet, Inc. 71 Third Avenue Burlington, MA 01803 bpenfield@acmepacket.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" ; "'Stastny Richard'" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > It is a correctly formed user=3Dphone, copying the phone-context > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring > example, it is a telephone number example. > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=3Dphone = has > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=3Ddialstring. The > user=3Dphone and user=3Ddialstring parameters should look the same. > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >Please read the draft. >> > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question >> >of >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=3Ddialstring. >> >It >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not >> >revisit >> that issue. >> > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. >> >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been >> converted into a SIP-Uri... >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >> > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it >> > should >> >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >> > >> > E.g. >> > >> > = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta.e >> > xam >> > pl >> > e.com;user=3Dphone >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Christer >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; >> > 'Stastny Richard' >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he >> > pointed out >> >> > I was >> > advocating: >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=3Dphone >> > >> > BAD: sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >> > ;user=3Ddialstring >> > >> > GOOD: sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com >> > ;user=3Ddialstring >> > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was >> > right. >> > >> > Brian >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since >> > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even = required >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with Tel-Uri. >> > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in >> > > that >> >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >> > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk >> > > about >> >> > > a >> > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if >> > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in >> > > RFC3966 >> >> > > (similar to user=3Dphone). >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > >> > > Christer >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >> > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that >> > > everybody agrees but the author... >> > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >> > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it >> > > unique because it is in the user part. >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that >> > > > it should be a URI parameter. >> > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or >> another. >> > > > >> > > > Brian >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM >> > > > To: Stastny Richard >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the >> > > > -02 I >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >> > > > >> > > > Paul >> > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: >> > > > > Hi Brian, >> > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: >> > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; >> > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com >> > > > > >> > > > > should read: >> > > > > >> > > > = sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u >> > > > ser=3Ddialstring >> > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip >> > > > > URI >> > > > > >> > > > > -sta >> > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ >> > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >> > > > > Internet-Drafts >> > > > directories. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the Session >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource >> > > > > Identifier >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> > > > > Pages : 8 >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a >> dial >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a >> > > > standardized >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter >> > > > "user=3Dphone", >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This >> memo >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", >> > > > so that one >> > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string as >> > > > a 'sip:' or >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. >> > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> > > > > >> > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. >> > > > tx >> > > > > t >> > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >> > > > message to >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >> > > > the body of >> > > > > the >> > > > message. >> > > > > You can also visit >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login >> > > > > with the >> > > > username >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >> > > > logging in, >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >> > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. >> > > > > In the body type: >> > > > > "FILE >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >> > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To >> > > > > use >> > this >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before >> > > > the "FILE" >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need >> > > > "munpack" or >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail >> > > > readers >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which >> > > > have been split >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local >> > > > documentation on >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail >> > > > > reader >> >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > --- >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > --- >> > > > -- >> > > > -- >> > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Iptel mailing list >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Iptel mailing list >> > > Iptel@ietf.org >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 16:57:38 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv7S-0001wG-AI; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:57:38 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv7Q-0001wB-Ll for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:57:36 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAv7P-0002tr-Ig for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:57:36 -0400 Received: from esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.121]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id E6A466E0002; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:57:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.176]) by esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:57:34 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:57:34 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:57:33 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F1304@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <0a1801c6bbf5$e2b719f0$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca7xjkVVxfH3o8SQ4aEezdecwchLAAJXw6gAAJ5xcAAACOm8A== From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Bob Penfield" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 20:57:34.0223 (UTC) FILETIME=[7002F9F0:01C6BBF6] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d67762704726a1bed57e7f4595960d34 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi,=20 >Since the tel uri RFC describes how you create a SIP URI that includes the phone-context in the userpart, we can either=20 >copy or reference that text. In that case you are converting a TEL-URI into a SIP-URI, but that is not what we are doing in the dialstring case. >The ABNF for the userpart allows the ";" and "=3D" characters, so there is no syntax problem. It's not a syntax problem, as far as the characters are concerned, but I wonder if it ever was an intention to define userpart parameters for a SIP-URI. And, we already have SIP-URI parameters, so why not use them? Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM > To: Bob Penfield; Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny=20 > Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax=20 > perspective. >=20 > RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. >=20 > RFC3261 does say that, if user=3Dphone, the userpart shall be parsed = as=20 > a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). >=20 > Now, if user=3Ddialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a=20 > SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters.=20 > So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of=20 > userpart. >=20 > One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if=20 > user=3Ddialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a=20 > DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. >=20 > So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. >=20 > I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I=20 > don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI > must be unique, but that's a separate thing. >=20 > I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best=20 > option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the=20 > decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Christer >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 > To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul=20 > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 > Brian, >=20 > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. >=20 > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone=20 > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > makes sense to me because 'user=3Dphone' means the userinfo of the SIP = > URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also=20 > makes sense to me that 'user=3Ddialstring' means that the userinfo=20 > contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a=20 > tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. >=20 > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI=20 > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context=20 > SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? >=20 > In summary, I see two options: >=20 > 1) = >=20 > 2) >=20 > I personally prefer option #1. >=20 > cheers, > (-:bob >=20 > Robert F. Penfield > Chief Software Architect > Acme Packet, Inc. > 71 Third Avenue > Burlington, MA 01803 > bpenfield@acmepacket.com >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Rosen" > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ;=20 > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 >=20 > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. >=20 > > It is a correctly formed user=3Dphone, copying the phone-context=20 > > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring=20 > > example, it is a telephone number example. > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=3Dphone = > > has >=20 > > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the=20 > > same >=20 > > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=3Ddialstring. The=20 > > user=3Dphone and user=3Ddialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look=20 > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> >Please read the draft. > >> > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the=20 > >> >question of > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with = user=3Ddialstring. > >> >It > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not=20 > >> >revisit > >> that issue. > >> > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > >> > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string?=20 > >> To >=20 > >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been=20 > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Christer > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why=20 > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > >> > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it=20 > >> > should > >> > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > >> > > >> > E.g. > >> > > >> > = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlanta > >> > .e > >> > xam > >> > pl > >> > e.com;user=3Dphone > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Christer > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange=20 > >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he=20 > >> > pointed out > >> > >> > I was > >> > advocating: > >> > > >> > GOOD: > sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=3Dphone > >> > > >> > BAD: > sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=3Ddialstring > >> > > >> > GOOD: > sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > >> > ;user=3Ddialstring > >> > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he=20 > >> > was >=20 > >> > right. > >> > > >> > Brian > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since=20 > >> > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even=20 > >> > > required >=20 > >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that=20 > >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with > Tel-Uri. > >> > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > >> > > that > >> > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > >> > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk=20 > >> > > about > >> > >> > > a > >> > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if=20 > >> > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > >> > > RFC3966 > >> > >> > > (similar to user=3Dphone). > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > > >> > > Christer > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that=20 > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > >> > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > >> > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes=20 > >> > > it >=20 > >> > > unique because it is in the user part. > >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree=20 > >> > > > that it should be a URI parameter. > >> > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > >> another. > >> > > > > >> > > > Brian > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the > >> > > > -02 I > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > >> > > > > >> > > > Paul > >> > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > >> > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > >> > > > > > >> > > > = sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com; > >> > > > u > >> > > > ser=3Ddialstring > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip=20 > >> > > > > URI > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org=20 > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > >> > > > directories. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the > Session > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform > Resource > >> > > > > Identifier > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > >> > > > > Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent > >> > > > > a > >> dial > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > >> > > > standardized > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > >> > > > "user=3Dphone", > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. =20 > >> > > > > This > >> memo > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > >> > > > so that one > >> > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial string = as > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > >> > > > tx > >> > > > > t > >> > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > >> > > > message to > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > >> > > > the body of > >> > > > > the > >> > > > message. > >> > > > > You can also visit > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login=20 > >> > > > > with the > >> > > > username > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > >> > > > logging in, > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > >> > > > > In the body type: > >> > > > > "FILE > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > >> > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document > in > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To > >> > > > > use > >> > this > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > >> > > > the "FILE" > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > >> > > > "munpack" or > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different=20 > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > >> > > > readers > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > with > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > >> > > > have been split > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > >> > > > documentation on > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail=20 > >> > > > > reader > >> > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version=20 > >> > > > > of >=20 > >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > --- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > --- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Iptel mailing list > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 17:05:48 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvFL-0000jk-R8; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:05:47 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvFK-0000jf-SG for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:05:46 -0400 Received: from cdx28.winwebhosting.com ([70.85.255.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvFK-0003Fh-2H for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:05:46 -0400 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSENLT40xp) by cdx28.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1GAvF6-0007Cr-35; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:05:33 -0500 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" , "'Bob Penfield'" , "'Francois Audet'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Stastny Richard'" Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:05:33 -0400 Message-ID: <0a2501c6bbf7$91e94d20$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Aca7xjkVVxfH3o8SQ4aEezdecwchLAAJXw6gAAJ5xcAAACOm8AAANoWg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F1304@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: br@brianrosen.net,brosen X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cdx28.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0e831a3b581a967a651997b2cbc2bae7 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org I feel really weird defending a proposal I spent a lot of time arguing against :) The tel uri RFC describes how you construct a URI which includes the phone-context in the userpart. It doesn't matter WHY you are doing that, it shows how, in both text and ABNF, you do that. That's what we would reference or copy. Agree that it's adding a new construct to the 3261 syntax, but the tel uri already did that, we would just be copying the same syntax. I would be very happy to return to my original plan of making the parameter appear after the hostpart. I do see Paul's point though. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 4:58 PM > To: Brian Rosen; Bob Penfield; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny > Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > Hi, > > >Since the tel uri RFC describes how you create a SIP URI that includes > the phone-context in the userpart, we can either > >copy or reference that text. > > In that case you are converting a TEL-URI into a SIP-URI, but that is > not what we are doing in the dialstring case. > > >The ABNF for the userpart allows the ";" and "=" characters, so there > is no syntax problem. > > It's not a syntax problem, as far as the characters are concerned, but I > wonder if it ever was an intention to define userpart parameters for a > SIP-URI. And, we already have SIP-URI parameters, so why not use them? > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM > > To: Bob Penfield; Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny > > Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax > > perspective. > > > > RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. > > > > RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as > > a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). > > > > Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a > > SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. > > So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of > > userpart. > > > > One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if > > user=dialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a > > DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. > > > > So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. > > > > I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I > > don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI > > > must be unique, but that's a separate thing. > > > > I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best > > option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the > > decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 > > To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Brian, > > > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone > > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > > > makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP > > URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also > > makes sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo > > contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a > > tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user > part. > > > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI > > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context > > SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? > > > > In summary, I see two options: > > > > 1) > > > > 2) > > > > I personally prefer option #1. > > > > cheers, > > (-:bob > > > > Robert F. Penfield > > Chief Software Architect > > Acme Packet, Inc. > > 71 Third Avenue > > Burlington, MA 01803 > > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Rosen" > > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip > uri. > > > > > It is a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context > > > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring > > > example, it is a telephone number example. > > > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone > > > has > > > > > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the > > > same > > > > > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The > > > user=phone and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. > > > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> >Please read the draft. > > >> > > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the > > >> >question of > > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. > > >> >It > > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not > > >> >revisit > > >> that issue. > > >> > > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that > > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > > >> > > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? > > >> To > > > > >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been > > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Christer > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why > > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? > > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > > >> > > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > > >> > should > > >> > > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > > >> > > > >> > E.g. > > >> > > > >> > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta > > >> > .e > > >> > xam > > >> > pl > > >> > e.com;user=phone > > >> > > > >> > Regards, > > >> > > > >> > Christer > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; > > > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange > > >> > with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he > > >> > pointed out > > >> > > >> > I was > > >> > advocating: > > >> > > > >> > GOOD: > > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=phone > > >> > > > >> > BAD: > > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=dialstring > > >> > > > >> > GOOD: > > sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=dialstring > > >> > > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he > > >> > was > > > > >> > right. > > >> > > > >> > Brian > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since > > >> > > user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even > > >> > > required > > > > >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that > > >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with > > Tel-Uri. > > >> > > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in > > > >> > > that > > >> > > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > >> > > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk > > >> > > about > > >> > > >> > > a > > >> > > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if > > >> > > user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in > > >> > > RFC3966 > > >> > > >> > > (similar to user=phone). > > >> > > > > >> > > Regards, > > >> > > > > >> > > Christer > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > >> > > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > > >> > > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > >> > > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes > > >> > > it > > > > >> > > unique because it is in the user part. > > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree > > >> > > > that it should be a URI parameter. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > > >> another. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Brian > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the > > >> > > > -02 I > > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Paul > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; > > >> > > > > phone-context=atlanta.example.com > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com; > > >> > > > u > > >> > > > ser=dialstring > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip > > >> > > > > URI > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > > >> > > > directories. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the > > Session > > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform > > Resource > > >> > > > > Identifier > > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > >> > > > > Filename : > draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent > > > >> > > > > a > > >> dial > > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > >> > > > standardized > > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter > > >> > > > "user=phone", > > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. > > >> > > > > This > > >> memo > > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", > > >> > > > so that one > > >> > > > > may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as > > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > >> > > > tx > > >> > > > > t > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > >> > > > message to > > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > >> > > > the body of > > >> > > > > the > > >> > > > message. > > >> > > > > You can also visit > > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login > > >> > > > > with the > > >> > > > username > > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > >> > > > logging in, > > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or > > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > >> > > > > In the body type: > > >> > > > > "FILE > > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document > > in > > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To > > > >> > > > > use > > >> > this > > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before > > >> > > > the "FILE" > > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need > > >> > > > "munpack" or > > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different > > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > > >> > > > readers > > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > > with > > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > >> > > > have been split > > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > >> > > > documentation on > > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > > >> > > > > reader > > >> > > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version > > >> > > > > of > > > > >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > --- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > >> > > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > --- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 17:19:25 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvSW-0002IF-Tp; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:19:24 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvSV-0002I9-G1 for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:19:23 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvSU-0004Jp-Ht for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:19:23 -0400 Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Aug 2006 14:19:22 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.08,107,1154934000"; d="scan'208"; a="335248250:sNHT32552626" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k79LJLOr019016; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:19:21 -0700 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k79LINHo003557; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:18:56 -0400 Received: from [161.44.79.104] ([161.44.79.104]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:18:55 -0400 Message-ID: <44DA513E.8070809@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:18:54 -0400 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)" Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt References: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12FF@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F12FF@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 21:18:55.0323 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B9B52B0:01C6BBF9] DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=16086; t=1155158361; x=1156022361; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:Re=3A=20[Iptel]=20Re=3A=20I-D=20ACTION=3Adraft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04 .txt; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DdF3ws8aW09dLg/H/Q1InkIrQwSc=3D; b=QvTtpKGxrcn9DqFSEbAwuI4Z58TCdN99a/mkL7SWx5kqgctnIN9HK+DeF6uYNgKbamhsrbnG YhyZo2bf3XTGlvxhvJ4sulJwiEjSz3KhJCTM+8SycUjXpwX4ev9GysNB; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3.cisco.com; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4a96669441ad70ecf6aebb4b47b971cd Cc: Bob Penfield , iptel@ietf.org, Francois Audet , Stastny Richard X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) wrote: > Hi, > > There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax > perspective. > > RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. Not explicitly. But the syntax it does define includes all the characters needed to include parameters in the user part. > RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as a > TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). > > Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a > SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. As far as 3261 is concerned, the URI: sip:1234;phone-context=foo.com@bar.com;user=dialstring is valid, but simply has a user part of "1234;phone-context=foo.com" with no special structure. The structure of it is (will be) defined by Brian's draft. > So, > I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of > userpart. Why? > One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if > user=dialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a > DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. > > So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. > > I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I > don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI > must be unique, but that's a separate thing. The user part doesn't need to be unique in the world, but it needs to be unique in the domain. Paul > I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best > option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the > decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 > To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > Brian, > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This > makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP URI > contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also makes > sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo contains all > the information about the dialstring, similar to a tel-URI. If that is > the case, then phone-context belongs in the user part. > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context SIP-URI > parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? > > In summary, I see two options: > > 1) > > 2) > > I personally prefer option #1. > > cheers, > (-:bob > > Robert F. Penfield > Chief Software Architect > Acme Packet, Inc. > 71 Third Avenue > Burlington, MA 01803 > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Rosen" > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> Aha. I see where I have confused you. >> >> The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip uri. > >> It is a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context >> parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring >> example, it is a telephone number example. >> >> The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone has > >> a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the same > >> phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The >> user=phone and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. >> >> Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look >> 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. >> >> Brian >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM >>> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>>> Please read the draft. >>>> >>>> We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the question >>>> of >>> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to >>>> cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous >>> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel >>>> uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. >>>> It >>> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to >>>> restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not >>>> revisit >>> that issue. >>>> If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that >>> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a >>>> dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. >>> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? To > >>> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been >>> converted into a SIP-Uri... >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Christer >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM >>>> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why >>>> would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? >>>> Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >>>> >>>> IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it >>>> should >>>> be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >>>> >>>> E.g. >>>> >>>> sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta.e >>>> xam >>>> pl >>>> e.com;user=phone >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Christer >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >>>> Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 >>>> To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; >>>> 'Stastny Richard' >>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>> >>>> In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange >>>> with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he >>>> pointed out >>>> I was >>>> advocating: >>>> >>>> GOOD: > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >>>> ;user=phone >>>> >>>> BAD: > sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >>>> ;user=dialstring >>>> >>>> GOOD: > sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com >>>> ;user=dialstring >>>> >>>> I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he was > >>>> right. >>>> >>>> Brian >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>>>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM >>>>> To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since >>>>> user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even required > >>>>> (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that >>>>> perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with > Tel-Uri. >>>>> The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in >>>>> that >>>>> case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >>>>> >>>>> HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk >>>>> about >>>>> a >>>>> Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if >>>>> user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in >>>>> RFC3966 >>>>> (similar to user=phone). >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Christer >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] >>>>> Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 >>>>> To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>> >>>>> I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that >>>>> everybody agrees but the author... >>>>> >>>>> It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >>>>> >>>>> A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes it > >>>>> unique because it is in the user part. >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM >>>>>> To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard >>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree that >>>>>> it should be a URI parameter. >>>>>> >>>>>> The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or >>> another. >>>>>> Brian >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM >>>>>> To: Stastny Richard >>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the >>>>>> -02 I >>>>>> think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. >>>>>> I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul >>>>>> >>>>>> Stastny Richard wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Brian, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMHO the examples are wrong: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> e.g.: >>>>>>> sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; >>>>>>> phone-context=atlanta.example.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> should read: >>>>>>> >>>>>> sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com;u >>>>>> ser=dialstring >>>>>>> Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip >>>>>>> URI >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -sta >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >>>>>>> [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >>>>>>> Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 >>>>>>> An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>>>>>> Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >>>>>>> Internet-Drafts >>>>>> directories. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Title : Dialstring parameter for the > Session >>>>>>> Initiation Protocol Uniform > Resource >>>>>>> Identifier >>>>>>> Author(s) : B. Rosen >>>>>>> Filename : draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>> Pages : 8 >>>>>>> Date : 2006-6-27 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent a >>> dial >>>>>>> string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a >>>>>> standardized >>>>>>> way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter >>>>>> "user=phone", >>>>>>> and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. This >>> memo >>>>>>> creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", >>>>>> so that one >>>>>>> may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as >>>>>> a 'sip:' or >>>>>>> 'sips:' URI. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>>>>>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. >>>>>> tx >>>>>>> t >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >>>>>> message to >>>>>>> i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >>>>>> the body of >>>>>>> the >>>>>> message. >>>>>>> You can also visit >>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >>>>>>> to change your subscription settings. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login >>>>>>> with the >>>>>> username >>>>>>> "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >>>>>> logging in, >>>>>>> type "cd internet-drafts" and then >>>>>>> "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Send a message to: >>>>>>> mailserv@ietf.org. >>>>>>> In the body type: >>>>>>> "FILE >>>> /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >>>>>>> NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document > in >>>>>>> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To >>>>>>> use >>>> this >>>>>>> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before >>>>>> the "FILE" >>>>>>> command. To decode the response(s), you will need >>>>>> "munpack" or >>>>>>> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different >>>>>>> MIME-compliant mail >>>>>> readers >>>>>>> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing > with >>>>>>> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which >>>>>> have been split >>>>>>> up into multiple messages), so check your local >>>>>> documentation on >>>>>>> how to manipulate these messages. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail >>>>>>> reader >>>>>>> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of > >>>>>>> the Internet-Draft. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> --- >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>>>>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> --- >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Iptel mailing list >>>>>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Iptel mailing list >>>>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Iptel mailing list >>>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Iptel mailing list >> Iptel@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Iptel mailing list > Iptel@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 09 17:37:47 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvkI-00072q-No; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:37:46 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvkH-0006u0-AE for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:37:45 -0400 Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GAvkF-0005vE-Au for iptel@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:37:45 -0400 Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Aug 2006 17:37:43 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.08,107,1154923200"; d="scan'208"; a="95935225:sNHT32214368" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k79LbguF013182; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:37:42 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k79Lbfe2018356; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:37:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:37:41 -0400 Received: from [161.44.79.104] ([161.44.79.104]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:37:41 -0400 Message-ID: <44DA55A4.4090707@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:37:40 -0400 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Rosen Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt References: <0a2501c6bbf7$91e94d20$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> In-Reply-To: <0a2501c6bbf7$91e94d20$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2006 21:37:41.0220 (UTC) FILETIME=[0AB19240:01C6BBFC] DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=19491; t=1155159462; x=1156023462; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:Re=3A=20[Iptel]=20Re=3A=20I-D=20ACTION=3Adraft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04 .txt |To:Brian=20Rosen=20; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DdF3ws8aW09dLg/H/Q1InkIrQwSc=3D; b=sT6JQJYx3nbj1+EPJSxbFdywujMX6woFzFz6+0p+Ps2tf06/bekITFNp8NGZ3a/yfuTaWWGR V6Rv8iGUrh0tKVcOqZG9b3YwizGdjX6bFbppP8S1KI4qJw/5Blt+679B; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d4673ea769cc9931269061744af205ce Cc: 'Bob Penfield' , iptel@ietf.org, 'Francois Audet' , 'Stastny Richard' , "'Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)'" X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Brian Rosen wrote: > I feel really weird defending a proposal I spent a lot of time arguing > against :) > > The tel uri RFC describes how you construct a URI which includes the > phone-context in the userpart. It doesn't matter WHY you are doing that, it > shows how, in both text and ABNF, you do that. That's what we would > reference or copy. > > Agree that it's adding a new construct to the 3261 syntax, but the tel uri > already did that, we would just be copying the same syntax. I was going to say this (well, not first sentence) but Brian beat me to it. The "user=dialstring" parameter allows the owning domain to treat the user part as a separate namespace from URIs with user=somethingelse. And then the draft specifies how to interpret user parts that are dialstrings. The one thing that you must be careful about is allowing dialstrings to be used as AORs for purposes of registration. (Not something I see a lot of value in.) Because 3261 says to ignore URI parameters when accessing the location service, sip:1234;phone-context=foo.com@bar.com;user=dialstring sip:1234;phone-context=foo.com@bar.com;user=phone sip:1234;phone-context=foo.com@bar.com are all equivalent for purposes of registration. And in case you think that is bad, the following are also equivalent for purposes of registration: sip:1234@bar.com;dialstring-context=foo.com sip:1234@bar.com Paul > I would be very happy to return to my original plan of making the parameter > appear after the hostpart. I do see Paul's point though. > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 4:58 PM >> To: Brian Rosen; Bob Penfield; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny >> Richard >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >> >> >> Hi, >> >>> Since the tel uri RFC describes how you create a SIP URI that includes >> the phone-context in the userpart, we can either >>> copy or reference that text. >> In that case you are converting a TEL-URI into a SIP-URI, but that is >> not what we are doing in the dialstring case. >> >>> The ABNF for the userpart allows the ";" and "=" characters, so there >> is no syntax problem. >> >> It's not a syntax problem, as far as the characters are concerned, but I >> wonder if it ever was an intention to define userpart parameters for a >> SIP-URI. And, we already have SIP-URI parameters, so why not use them? >> >> Regards, >> >> Christer >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM >>> To: Bob Penfield; Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny >>> Richard >>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax >>> perspective. >>> >>> RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. >>> >>> RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as >>> a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). >>> >>> Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a >>> SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. >>> So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of >>> userpart. >>> >>> One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if >>> user=dialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a >>> DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. >>> >>> So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. >>> >>> I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But, I >>> don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A TEL-URI >>> must be unique, but that's a separate thing. >>> >>> I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the best >>> option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and that the >>> decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Christer >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] >>> Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 >>> To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul >>> Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' >>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>> >>> Brian, >>> >>> I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. >>> >>> If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone >>> number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part. This >>> makes sense to me because 'user=phone' means the userinfo of the SIP >>> URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it also >>> makes sense to me that 'user=dialstring' means that the userinfo >>> contains all the information about the dialstring, similar to a >>> tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the user >> part. >>> On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI >>> parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. >>> dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. >>> But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context >>> SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? >>> >>> In summary, I see two options: >>> >>> 1) >>> >>> 2) >>> >>> I personally prefer option #1. >>> >>> cheers, >>> (-:bob >>> >>> Robert F. Penfield >>> Chief Software Architect >>> Acme Packet, Inc. >>> 71 Third Avenue >>> Burlington, MA 01803 >>> bpenfield@acmepacket.com >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Brian Rosen" >>> To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; >>> "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" >>> ; "'Stastny Richard'" >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM >>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>> >>> >>>> Aha. I see where I have confused you. >>>> >>>> The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip >> uri. >>>> It is a correctly formed user=phone, copying the phone-context >>>> parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring >>>> example, it is a telephone number example. >>>> >>>> The three examples show that if a telephone number with user=phone >>>> has >>>> a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the >>>> same >>>> phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=dialstring. The >>>> user=phone and user=dialstring parameters should look the same. >>>> >>>> Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look >>>> 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. >>>> >>>> Brian >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>>>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM >>>>> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>> Please read the draft. >>>>>> >>>>>> We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the >>>>>> question of >>>>> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to >>>>>> cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous >>>>> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel >>>>>> uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=dialstring. >>>>>> It >>>>> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to >>>>>> restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not >>>>>> revisit >>>>> that issue. >>>>>> If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something that >>>>> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a >>>>>> dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. >>>>> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? >>>>> To >>>>> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been >>>>> converted into a SIP-Uri... >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Christer >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>>>>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM >>>>>> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why >>>>>> would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? >>>>>> Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. >>>>>> >>>>>> IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it >>>>>> should >>>>>> be a new Tel-Uri parameter. >>>>>> >>>>>> E.g. >>>>>> >>>>>> sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com;xxx=dialstring@atlanta >>>>>> .e >>>>>> xam >>>>>> pl >>>>>> e.com;user=phone >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Christer >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >>>>>> Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 >>>>>> To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul Kyzivat'; >>>>>> 'Stastny Richard' >>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email exchange >>>>>> with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me was that he >>>>>> pointed out >>>>>> I was >>>>>> advocating: >>>>>> >>>>>> GOOD: >>> sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >>>>>> ;user=phone >>>>>> >>>>>> BAD: >>> sip:1234;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com >>>>>> ;user=dialstring >>>>>> >>>>>> GOOD: >>> sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=atlanta.example.com >>>>>> ;user=dialstring >>>>>> >>>>>> I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he >>>>>> was >>>>>> right. >>>>>> >>>>>> Brian >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) >>>>>>> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM >>>>>>> To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since >>>>>>> user=phone is not used, the user part syntax is not even >>>>>>> required >>>>>>> (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that >>>>>>> perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with >>> Tel-Uri. >>>>>>> The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so in >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> case the parameter should of be located after the host part. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should talk >>>>>>> about >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if >>>>>>> user=dialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined in >>>>>>> RFC3966 >>>>>>> (similar to user=phone). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Christer >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] >>>>>>> Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 >>>>>>> To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard >>>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that >>>>>>> everybody agrees but the author... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context makes >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> unique because it is in the user part. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM >>>>>>>> To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard >>>>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree >>>>>>>> that it should be a URI parameter. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or >>>>> another. >>>>>>>> Brian >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM >>>>>>>> To: Stastny Richard >>>>>>>> Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D >>>>>>>> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and the >>>>>>>> -02 I >>>>>>>> think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. >>>>>>>> I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stastny Richard wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi Brian, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> IMHO the examples are wrong: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> e.g.: >>>>>>>>> sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=dialstring; >>>>>>>>> phone-context=atlanta.example.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> should read: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> sip:123;phone-context=atlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.com; >>>>>>>> u >>>>>>>> ser=dialstring >>>>>>>>> Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the sip >>>>>>>>> URI >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -sta >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >>>>>>>>> [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >>>>>>>>> Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 >>>>>>>>> An: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>>>>>>>> Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >>>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts >>>>>>>> directories. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Title : Dialstring parameter for the >>> Session >>>>>>>>> Initiation Protocol Uniform >>> Resource >>>>>>>>> Identifier >>>>>>>>> Author(s) : B. Rosen >>>>>>>>> Filename : >> draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >>>>>>>>> Pages : 8 >>>>>>>>> Date : 2006-6-27 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not represent >>>>>>>>> a >>>>> dial >>>>>>>>> string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a >>>>>>>> standardized >>>>>>>>> way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI parameter >>>>>>>> "user=phone", >>>>>>>>> and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. >>>>>>>>> This >>>>> memo >>>>>>>>> creates a new value for the user parameter "dialstring", >>>>>>>> so that one >>>>>>>>> may specify "user=dialstring" to encode a dial string as >>>>>>>> a 'sip:' or >>>>>>>>> 'sips:' URI. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>>>>>>>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. >>>>>>>> tx >>>>>>>>> t >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >>>>>>>> message to >>>>>>>>> i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >>>>>>>> the body of >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> message. >>>>>>>>> You can also visit >>>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >>>>>>>>> to change your subscription settings. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login >>>>>>>>> with the >>>>>>>> username >>>>>>>>> "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >>>>>>>> logging in, >>>>>>>>> type "cd internet-drafts" and then >>>>>>>>> "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >>>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >>>>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Send a message to: >>>>>>>>> mailserv@ietf.org. >>>>>>>>> In the body type: >>>>>>>>> "FILE >>>>>> /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". >>>>>>>>> NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document >>> in >>>>>>>>> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To >>>>>>>>> use >>>>>> this >>>>>>>>> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before >>>>>>>> the "FILE" >>>>>>>>> command. To decode the response(s), you will need >>>>>>>> "munpack" or >>>>>>>>> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different >>>>>>>>> MIME-compliant mail >>>>>>>> readers >>>>>>>>> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing >>> with >>>>>>>>> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which >>>>>>>> have been split >>>>>>>>> up into multiple messages), so check your local >>>>>>>> documentation on >>>>>>>>> how to manipulate these messages. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail >>>>>>>>> reader >>>>>>>>> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> the Internet-Draft. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>>>>>>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>>>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Iptel mailing list >>>>>>>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Iptel mailing list >>>>>>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Iptel mailing list >>>>>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Iptel mailing list >>>> Iptel@ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Iptel mailing list >>> Iptel@ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 10 03:42:18 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GB5BC-0000ae-4a; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:42:10 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GB5BA-0000VY-N0 for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:42:08 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GB5B7-0003Xb-8o for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:42:08 -0400 Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.122]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 655FA8E0002; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:42:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.173]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:42:03 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:42:03 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:42:02 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F130B@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <0a2501c6bbf7$91e94d20$9de6a8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca7xjkVVxfH3o8SQ4aEezdecwchLAAJXw6gAAJ5xcAAACOm8AAANoWgABYGtwA= From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Bob Penfield" , "Francois Audet" , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Stastny Richard" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2006 07:42:03.0323 (UTC) FILETIME=[789760B0:01C6BC50] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f31e050dc7ce62aeed70903f7da21012 Cc: iptel@ietf.org X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi,=20 >I feel really weird defending a proposal I spent a lot of time arguing against :) =20 > >The tel uri RFC describes how you construct a URI which includes the phone-context in the userpart. I am not sure I agree. The TEL-URI describes how you define a TEL-URI, which includes the phone-context parameter. That itself has nothing to do with the SIP-URI userpart. We then have a mechanism to map a TEL-URI into a SIP-URI, by adding the whole TEL-URI (including the parameters) to the SIP-URI userpart, and add user=3Dphone to indicate that the userpart shall be parsed as a TEL-URI. In the dialstring case you are NOT mapping another URI type into a SIP-URI - you are adding (to use your own words) a new construct to the SIP-URI. >It doesn't matter WHY you are doing that, it shows how, in both text and ABNF, you do that. That's what we would=20 >reference or copy. In the dialstring case the SIP-URI userpart is still parsed as a SIP-URI. I agree that all the characters etc are allowed, but the issue is really that we are adding parameters to the SIP-URI userpart. >Agree that it's adding a new construct to the 3261 syntax, but the tel uri already did that, we would just be copying the=20 >same syntax. > >I would be very happy to return to my original plan of making the parameter appear after the hostpart. I do see Paul's=20 >point though. Has this been discussed on the SIP/SIPPING list? I do NOT want to start a never-ending marathon discussion, but IF we want to add this new SIP-URI construct I really think people there should have a say about it... Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 4:58 PM > To: Brian Rosen; Bob Penfield; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny=20 > Richard > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > >Since the tel uri RFC describes how you create a SIP URI that=20 > >includes > the phone-context in the userpart, we can either > >copy or reference that text. >=20 > In that case you are converting a TEL-URI into a SIP-URI, but that is=20 > not what we are doing in the dialstring case. >=20 > >The ABNF for the userpart allows the ";" and "=3D" characters, so = there > is no syntax problem. >=20 > It's not a syntax problem, as far as the characters are concerned, but > I wonder if it ever was an intention to define userpart parameters for > a SIP-URI. And, we already have SIP-URI parameters, so why not use them? >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Christer >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:49 PM > > To: Bob Penfield; Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny > > Richard > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > There is still an issue with option #1, I think, from a syntax=20 > > perspective. > > > > RFC3261 does not define parameters for the userpart of the SIP-URI. > > > > RFC3261 does say that, if user=3Dphone, the userpart shall be parsed = > > as a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). > > > > Now, if user=3Ddialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a=20 > > SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. > > So, I think option #1 is not in line with the RFC3261 definition of=20 > > userpart. > > > > One option would be to define a DIAL-URI, and say that if=20 > > user=3Ddialstring the userpart of the SIP-URI shall be parsed as a=20 > > DIAL-URI. No, I know we don't want to do that. > > > > So, from that perspective option #2 would be better. > > > > I think someone said earlier that the userpart must be unique. But,=20 > > I don't think that the userpart of a SIP-URI must be unique... A=20 > > TEL-URI >=20 > > must be unique, but that's a separate thing. > > > > I still think that defining a new TEL-URI parameter would be the=20 > > best option. Brian said, however, that it has been discussed and=20 > > that the decission was not to do that, so I will respect that decission. > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bob Penfield [mailto:BPenfield@acmepacket.com] > > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 18:12 > > To: Brian Rosen; Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul > > Kyzivat'; 'Stastny Richard' > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > Brian, > > > > I am now totally confused as to what your current proposal is. > > > > If dialstring is going to be done in a SIP-URI 'like' a telephone=20 > > number, then I would say the phone-context goes in the user part.=20 > > This >=20 > > makes sense to me because 'user=3Dphone' means the userinfo of the = SIP > > URI contains a tel-URI. Granted we don't have a dial-URI, but it=20 > > also makes sense to me that 'user=3Ddialstring' means that the=20 > > userinfo contains all the information about the dialstring, similar=20 > > to a tel-URI. If that is the case, then phone-context belongs in the > > user > part. > > > > On the other hand, if we insist on the context being a SIP-URI=20 > > parameter, I would recommend we choose a different name (e.g. > > dial-context) so that its not confused with the tel-URI phone-context. > > But that still leaves the question of what does a phone-context=20 > > SIP-URI parameter mean when user-dialstring is no present? > > > > In summary, I see two options: > > > > 1) = > > > > 2) = > > > > I personally prefer option #1. > > > > cheers, > > (-:bob > > > > Robert F. Penfield > > Chief Software Architect > > Acme Packet, Inc. > > 71 Third Avenue > > Burlington, MA 01803 > > bpenfield@acmepacket.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Rosen" > > To: "'Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)'" ; > > "'Francois Audet'" ; "'Paul Kyzivat'" > > ; "'Stastny Richard'" > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:25 AM > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > > > > > > Aha. I see where I have confused you. > > > > > > The first "GOOD" is how a telephone number is expressed in a sip > uri. > > > > > It is a correctly formed user=3Dphone, copying the phone-context=20 > > > parameter as described in the tel uri rfc. It is NOT a dialstring > > > example, it is a telephone number example. > > > > > > The three examples show that if a telephone number with = user=3Dphone > > > has > > > > > a phone-context before the '@', it looks really wrong to show the=20 > > > same > > > > > phone-context parameter after the '@' if user=3Ddialstring. The=20 > > > user=3Dphone and user=3Ddialstring parameters should look the = same. > > > > > > Even if you changed the name of the parameter, it still would look > > > 'wrong', even if the ABNF made it right. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > > >> [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 9:04 AM > > >> To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> >Please read the draft. > > >> > > > >> >We spent a long time in the evolution of this draft on the=20 > > >> >question of > > >> whether or not we would extend the tel uri to > > >> >cover dialstrings, or do what this version (and several previous > > >> versions) do, which is to NOT allow dialstrings in a tel > > >> >uri, but rather restrict them to a sip uri, with user=3Ddialstring. > > >> >It > > >> was a consensus to NOT extend the tel uri, and to > > >> >restrict dialstrings to sip uris only. I'd really rather not=20 > > >> >revisit > > >> that issue. > > >> > > > >> >If a SIP uri contains a dialstring, there has to be something=20 > > >> >that > > >> tells you it's not a telephone number and is a > > >> >dialstring, so your suggestion is not acceptable I think. > > >> > > >> So, in the first GOOD, what tells you the number is a dial string? > > >> To > > > > >> me it looks like a normal Tel-Uri local number which has been=20 > > >> converted into a SIP-Uri... > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Christer > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > > >> > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:49 AM > > >> > To: Brian Rosen; Francois Audet; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > I think the first GOOD is good, but the second GOOD is bad. Why > > >> > would we need to define a new phone-context SIP URI parameter? > > >> > Also, the first GOOD is "comaptible" with a Tel-Uri. > > >> > > > >> > IF we really need to indicate "dialstring" somewhere I think it > > >> > should > > >> > > >> > be a new Tel-Uri parameter. > > >> > > > >> > E.g. > > >> > > > >> > = sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com;xxx=3Ddialstring@atlan > > >> > ta > > >> > .e > > >> > xam > > >> > pl > > >> > e.com;user=3Dphone > > >> > > > >> > Regards, > > >> > > > >> > Christer > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >> > Sent: 9. elokuuta 2006 15:41 > > >> > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); 'Francois Audet'; 'Paul=20 > > >> > Kyzivat'; >=20 > > >> > 'Stastny Richard' > > >> > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > >> > In an effort to close this issue, I had a private email=20 > > >> > exchange with Paul Kyzivat. The part of that that swayed me=20 > > >> > was that he pointed out > > >> > > >> > I was > > >> > advocating: > > >> > > > >> > GOOD: > > sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=3Dphone > > >> > > > >> > BAD: > > sip:1234;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@atlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=3Ddialstring > > >> > > > >> > GOOD: > > sip:1234@atlanta.example.com;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > > >> > ;user=3Ddialstring > > >> > > > >> > I looked at that, and pretty quickly decided I was wrong and he > > >> > was > > > > >> > right. > > >> > > > >> > Brian > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)=20 > > >> > > [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com] > > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:37 AM > > >> > > To: Francois Audet; Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny=20 > > >> > > Richard > > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > > > >> > > Currently the draft does not talk about Tel-Uri. Also, since=20 > > >> > > user=3Dphone is not used, the user part syntax is not even=20 > > >> > > required > > > > >> > > (as per RFC3261) to be according to RFC3966. So, from that=20 > > >> > > perspective there is no requirement to be consistent with > > Tel-Uri. > > >> > > > > >> > > The draft only talks about a Sip-Uri extension/parameter, so=20 > > >> > > in >=20 > > >> > > that > > >> > > >> > > case the parameter should of be located after the host part. > > >> > > > > >> > > HOWEVER, I DO agree with Farncois (and others). We should=20 > > >> > > talk about > > >> > > >> > > a > > >> > > > >> > > Tel-Uri extension. But, then we also need to define that if=20 > > >> > > user=3Ddialstrong, the user part shall be parsed as defined = in > > >> > > RFC3966 > > >> > > >> > > (similar to user=3Dphone). > > >> > > > > >> > > Regards, > > >> > > > > >> > > Christer > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet@nortel.com] > > >> > > Sent: 8. elokuuta 2006 23:13 > > >> > > To: Brian Rosen; Paul Kyzivat; Stastny Richard > > >> > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D > > >> > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > >> > > I agree with Paul, Richard and everybody else on this thread. > > >> > > > > >> > > I'm not sure why you say this is an open issue. It seems that > > >> > > everybody agrees but the author... > > >> > > > > >> > > It needs to be consistent with Tel URI. > > >> > > > > >> > > A URI is a URI. It needs to be Unique. The phone-context=20 > > >> > > makes it > > > > >> > > unique because it is in the user part. > > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:16 AM > > >> > > > To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Stastny Richard > > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The form of the parameter is an open issue; I don't agree=20 > > >> > > > that it should be a URI parameter. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The * & # is an oversight, and I'll get it fixed one way or > > >> another. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Brian > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > > >> > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:20 PM > > >> > > > To: Stastny Richard > > >> > > > Cc: iptel@ietf.org; Rosen, Brian > > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D=20 > > >> > > > ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I agree with Richard. And I brought it up on the -03 (and=20 > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > -02 I > > >> > > > think) versions as well. There is also the issue of * & #. > > >> > > > I'm attaching an old message that covers most of that. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Paul > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Stastny Richard wrote: > > >> > > > > Hi Brian, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO the examples are wrong: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > e.g.: > > >> > > > > sip:123@sippbx.example.com;user=3Ddialstring; > > >> > > > > phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > should read: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > = sip:123;phone-context=3Datlanta.example.com@sippbx.example.co > > >> > > > m; > > >> > > > u > > >> > > > ser=3Ddialstring > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone-context is part of the tel: URI and not from the=20 > > >> > > > > sip URI > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -sta > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > ________________________________ > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Von: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org=20 > > >> > > > > [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] > > >> > > > > Gesendet: Mi 28.06.2006 00:50 > > >> > > > > An: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > >> > > > > Betreff: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts > > >> > > > directories. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Title : Dialstring parameter for the > > Session > > >> > > > > Initiation Protocol Uniform > > Resource > > >> > > > > Identifier > > >> > > > > Author(s) : B. Rosen > > >> > > > > Filename : > draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >> > > > > Pages : 8 > > >> > > > > Date : 2006-6-27 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > RFC3966 explicitly states that 'tel' URIs may not=20 > > >> > > > > represent >=20 > > >> > > > > a > > >> dial > > >> > > > > string. That leaves no way specify a dial string in a > > >> > > > standardized > > >> > > > > way. Great confusion exists with the SIP URI=20 > > >> > > > > parameter > > >> > > > "user=3Dphone", > > >> > > > > and specifically, if it can represent a dial string. > > >> > > > > This > > >> memo > > >> > > > > creates a new value for the user parameter=20 > > >> > > > > "dialstring", > > >> > > > so that one > > >> > > > > may specify "user=3Ddialstring" to encode a dial = string=20 > > >> > > > > as > > >> > > > a 'sip:' or > > >> > > > > 'sips:' URI. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04. > > >> > > > tx > > >> > > > > t > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > >> > > > message to > > >> > > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe=20 > > >> > > > > in > > >> > > > the body of > > >> > > > > the > > >> > > > message. > > >> > > > > You can also visit > > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > >> > > > > to change your subscription settings. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP.=20 > > >> > > > > Login with the > > >> > > > username > > >> > > > > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > > >> > > > logging in, > > >> > > > > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > >> > > > > "get draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > >> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > >> > > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Send a message to: > > >> > > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > >> > > > > In the body type: > > >> > > > > "FILE > > >> > /internet-drafts/draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt". > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document > > in > > >> > > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. =20 > > >> > > > > To >=20 > > >> > > > > use > > >> > this > > >> > > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime"=20 > > >> > > > > before > > >> > > > the "FILE" > > >> > > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will=20 > > >> > > > > need > > >> > > > "munpack" or > > >> > > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different=20 > > >> > > > > MIME-compliant mail > > >> > > > readers > > >> > > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when=20 > > >> > > > > dealing > > with > > >> > > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which > > >> > > > have been split > > >> > > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local > > >> > > > documentation on > > >> > > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail > > >> > > > > reader > > >> > > >> > > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII=20 > > >> > > > > version of > > > > >> > > > > the Internet-Draft. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > --- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > > I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org=20 > > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > --- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > Iptel mailing list > > >> > > Iptel@ietf.org > > >> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Iptel mailing list > > > Iptel@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Iptel mailing list > > Iptel@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 10 03:50:53 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GB5Jc-0006h8-Kt; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:50:52 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GB5Jb-0006gr-F7 for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:50:51 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GB5Ja-0004T8-1H for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:50:51 -0400 Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.122]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 721E58E0002; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:50:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.175]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:50:48 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:50:48 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:50:47 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F130C@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <44DA513E.8070809@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca7+X2wIAu66JWTQ2mRgzoSf7lfUAAVzntw From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Paul Kyzivat" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2006 07:50:48.0740 (UTC) FILETIME=[B1C3A640:01C6BC51] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Cc: Bob Penfield , iptel@ietf.org, Francois Audet , Stastny Richard X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org Hi,=20 >>RFC3261 does say that, if user=3Dphone, the userpart shall be parsed = as=20 >>a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). >>=20 >>Now, if user=3Ddialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a=20 >>SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. >> >As far as 3261 is concerned, the URI: > > sip:1234;phone-context=3Dfoo.com@bar.com;user=3Ddialstring > >is valid, but simply has a user part of "1234;phone-context=3Dfoo.com"=20 >with no special structure. The structure of it is (will be) defined by Brian's draft. I DO agree that there is no problem from a syntax perspective, and an entity that doesn't support user=3Ddialstring will not treat the whole userpart as a single string.=20 I just wonder whether it's in the "spirit of SIP" to do it like this :) I am sure there is a reason why the SIP-URI parameters where defined at the end of the URI. I don't want to be a showstopper on this, and personally I could live with the currently proposed solution, but I think we should verify (unless we have already done that) with the SIP people that doing this is ok from a "fundamental" perspecitve. Or, do you think that is not needed? Regards, Christer _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 10 09:17:21 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBAPN-0003L4-71; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:17:09 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBAPM-0003Hw-Aq for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:17:08 -0400 Received: from host10.216.41.24.conversent.net ([216.41.24.10] helo=acmepacket.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBAPK-00037X-0G for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:17:08 -0400 Received: from BPenfield [10.0.200.6] by acmepacket.com with ESMTP (SMTPD-9.03) id A1C70190; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:16:55 -0400 Message-ID: <002801c6bc7f$409828a0$800101df@acmepacket.com> From: "Bob Penfield" To: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" , "Paul Kyzivat" References: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F130C@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:16:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b4a0a5f5992e2a4954405484e7717d8c Cc: iptel@ietf.org, Francois Audet , Stastny Richard X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)" To: "Paul Kyzivat" Cc: "Bob Penfield" ; "Brian Rosen" ; "Francois Audet" ; "Stastny Richard" ; Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 3:50 AM Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt > > >Hi, > >>>RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as >>>a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). >>> >>>Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a >>>SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. >>> >>As far as 3261 is concerned, the URI: >> >> sip:1234;phone-context=foo.com@bar.com;user=dialstring >> >>is valid, but simply has a user part of "1234;phone-context=foo.com" >>with no special structure. The structure of it is (will be) defined >>by Brian's draft. > >I DO agree that there is no problem from a syntax perspective, and an >entity that doesn't support user=dialstring will not treat the whole >userpart as a single string. > >I just wonder whether it's in the "spirit of SIP" to do it like >this :) I >am sure there is a reason why the SIP-URI parameters where >defined at the end of the URI. I think you've just hit on the essential point. The proposed "phone-context" is a dialstring parameter. It is not a SIP-URI parameter. I don't think this draft is in conflict with the "spirit of SIP" at all. We have the tel-URI precedent for "structure" in the user part defined in 3261. It is not that unusual for the user part to have 'structure' that is understood by servers that care about it and is an opaque string to those that do not. For example, RFC 4240 (Basic Network Media Services with SIP) defines a user part format for identifying a conference service: sip:conf=uniqueIdentifier@mediaserver.example.net Even though the dialstring is not a URI, I think we are trying to be consistent in the usage of the user= URI parameter when it indicates the content-type of the user part of the URI, particularly since dialstrings are a close cousin of telephone numbers. > >I don't want to be a showstopper on this, and personally I could live >with the currently proposed solution, but I think we should verify >(unless we have already done that) with the SIP people that doing this >is ok from a "fundamental" perspecitve. Or, do you think that is not >needed? > >Regards, > >Christer > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 10 09:21:05 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBAT4-0005RR-AN; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:58 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBAT3-0005RM-L7 for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:57 -0400 Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBAT1-0003Hb-B3 for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:57 -0400 Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2006 09:20:55 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.08,110,1154923200"; d="scan'208"; a="96026964:sNHT28216498" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7ADKsT6020310; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:54 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k7ADKre2026787; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:53 -0400 Received: from [161.44.79.104] ([161.44.79.104]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:53 -0400 Message-ID: <44DB32B4.6070605@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:20:52 -0400 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF)" Subject: Re: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt References: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F130C@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F130C@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2006 13:20:53.0343 (UTC) FILETIME=[CE3A3EF0:01C6BC7F] DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=2979; t=1155216054; x=1156080054; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:Re=3A=20[Iptel]=20Re=3A=20I-D=20ACTION=3Adraft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04 .txt |To:=22Christer=20Holmberg=20(JO/LMF)=22=20; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DdF3ws8aW09dLg/H/Q1InkIrQwSc=3D; b=k96RkdSH8QiHnSHkXhWqGsrZpFGDIxwQJN0a5I9AZHQicvZutBlEzBQypaqlWpHsCBzeIe5c uLkfSIuYxAcSZQwfczx+WfdVw7FTHzcH6bGmVVXDzVjI62t5oYtZsqHo; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 92df29fa99cf13e554b84c8374345c17 Cc: Bob Penfield , iptel@ietf.org, Francois Audet , Stastny Richard X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org at end ... Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) wrote: > Hi, > >>> RFC3261 does say that, if user=phone, the userpart shall be parsed as >>> a TEL-URI, which may have parameters (phone-context etc). >>> >>> Now, if user=dialstring, the userpart shall still be parsed as a >>> SIP-URI, which means it is not possible to put userpart parameters. >>> >> As far as 3261 is concerned, the URI: >> >> sip:1234;phone-context=foo.com@bar.com;user=dialstring >> >> is valid, but simply has a user part of "1234;phone-context=foo.com" >> with no special structure. The structure of it is (will be) defined by > Brian's draft. > > I DO agree that there is no problem from a syntax perspective, and an > entity that doesn't support user=dialstring will not treat the whole > userpart as a single string. > > I just wonder whether it's in the "spirit of SIP" to do it like this :) > I am sure there is a reason why the SIP-URI parameters where defined at > the end of the URI. The phone-context "parameter" we are defining isn't intended to be a "uri-parameter" according to the syntax and/or semantics of 3261. It is something entirely new. It serves a special purpose, and as such I think it can be as we wish. Whether something is "in the spirit of SIP" is a judgment call. I think some sense of the spirit can be inferred from the way user=phone was defined - it set the precedent that a deeper syntax for the user part could be tied to a value of the "user" parameter. We are just reusing that same approach. Note that it isn't just this "parameter" that has a special interpretation. The whole point is that the dial string has a special interpretation too. A dial string *could* have the same form as the user part of a sip/user=phone URI or the user part of a sip URI with no "user" parameter. But all three have different meanings. > I don't want to be a showstopper on this, and personally I could live > with the currently proposed solution, but I think we should verify > (unless we have already done that) with the SIP people which "sip people" did you have in mind? I just now noticed that this is on the iptel list rather than the sip or sipping list, so maybe that is what you mean. But I think if you look at who is posting, its all the same people on all those lists. Are you proposing a formal liason request from the iptel WG to the sip WG? I guess we could ask Jonathan and Henning to approve. If there are any people who qualify as "sip people" I guess it would be them. But Jonathan is chair of iptel, so I suppose he would already have commented if he wanted to. And Henning is author of 3966. I expect he is well aware of this discussion as well. So I doubt we need to ask them. > that doing this > is ok from a "fundamental" perspecitve. Or, do you think that is not > needed? No, I don't think it is needed. Any further concerns would be flushed out at WGLC. Paul _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 10 16:54:59 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBHYH-0008Hd-0E; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:54:49 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBHYF-0008HT-Mj for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:54:47 -0400 Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GBHYD-0000HE-S8 for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:54:47 -0400 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 3ADFB6E0001; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:54:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.174]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:54:45 +0200 Received: from esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.4]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:54:44 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:54:44 +0200 Message-ID: <5EB80D22825EEE42872083AD5BFFB594017F131C@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <44DB32B4.6070605@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Iptel] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-rosen-iptel-dialstring-04.txt Thread-Index: Aca8f9FvPp1pJ2svQLWxyn6KpTxmCwAPD69g From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" To: "Paul Kyzivat" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2006 20:54:44.0880 (UTC) FILETIME=[357D0900:01C6BCBF] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135 Cc: Bob Penfield , iptel@ietf.org, Francois Audet , Stastny Richard X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org =20 Hi, >>I just wonder whether it's in the "spirit of SIP" to do it like this=20 >>:) I am sure there is a reason why the SIP-URI parameters where=20 >>defined at the end of the URI. >> >The phone-context "parameter" we are defining isn't intended to be a "uri-parameter" according to the syntax and/or=20 >semantics of 3261. It is something entirely new. > >It serves a special purpose, and as such I think it can be as we wish. > >Whether something is "in the spirit of SIP" is a judgment call. I think some sense of the spirit can be inferred from the=20 >way user=3Dphone was defined - it set the precedent that a deeper = syntax for the user part could be tied to a value of the=20 >"user" parameter. We are just reusing that same approach. We ARE defining a new value for the user parameter, though. According to RFC3969 that must be documented in an RFC.=20 RFC3969 does not say whether that RFC has to be produced by SIP/SIPPING, though, so maybe any WG (IPTEL in this case) can produce such RFC (and the SIP WG doesn't have to be informed about it until the RFC is done)... >>>Note that it isn't just this "parameter" that has a special interpretation. The whole point is that the dial string has=20 >>>a special interpretation too. A dial string *could* have the same form as the user part of a sip/user=3Dphone URI or the=20 >>>user part of a sip URI with no "user" parameter. But all three have different meanings. >>> >>I don't want to be a showstopper on this, and personally I could live=20 >>with the currently proposed solution, but I think we should verify=20 >>(unless we have already done that) with the SIP people >which "sip people" did you have in mind? > >I just now noticed that this is on the iptel list rather than the sip or sipping list, so maybe that is what you mean.=20 Yes. >But I think if you look at who is posting, its all the same people on all those lists. Are you proposing a formal liason=20 >request from the iptel WG to the sip WG? No, I don't think that is needed. A simple mail on the SIP list would be enough. However, IF the SIP WG allows for other groups to define new URI parameter values etc I guess not even that would be needed. >I guess we could ask Jonathan and Henning to approve. If there are any people who qualify as "sip people" I guess it=20 >would be them. > >But Jonathan is chair of iptel, so I suppose he would already have commented if he wanted to. And Henning is author of=20 >3966. I expect he is well aware of this discussion as well. So I doubt we need to ask them. Unless there are some "formal rules" saying that the SIP WG must be involved I can accept that.=20 Regards, Christer _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel From iptel-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 29 16:41:27 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GIANn-0001cy-Te; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:40:27 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GIANi-0001bf-FT; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:40:22 -0400 Received: from ns1.neustar.com ([2001:503:c779:1a::9c9a:108a]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GIANi-0003fa-5D; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:40:22 -0400 Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns1.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60EA926F12; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:50:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GI9b0-0001m5-8o; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 15:50:02 -0400 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 15:50:02 -0400 X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-Scan-Signature: b7b9551d71acde901886cc48bfc088a6 Cc: iptel@ietf.org Subject: [Iptel] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IP Telephony List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Telephony Working Group of the IETF. Title : NP Parameters for the "tel" URI Author(s) : J. Yu Filename : draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2006-8-29 This document defines five parameters in the "tel" Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) to carry the number portability (NP)-related information. Those parameters can be passed to the next-hop network node after an NP database dip has been performed. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2006-8-29144100.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-11.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2006-8-29144100.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel --NextPart--