From gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com Tue Apr 12 05:53:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674DFE06F5 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 05:53:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qg3TWZX3kjdz for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 05:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (mailgw9.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.57]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EDA4E0782 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 05:53:30 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb39-b7c6dae0000023f2-a3-4da44b49a7ca Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 00.A4.09202.94B44AD4; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:53:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [131.160.126.135] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.137.0; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:53:28 +0200 Message-ID: <4DA44B49.4030608@ericsson.com> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:53:29 +0300 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "salud@ietf.org" References: <4C90B977.3000608@ericsson.com> <4CE52F78.7050706@ericsson.com> <4D42B356.7080704@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <4D42B356.7080704@ericsson.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Subject: Re: [salud] Little activity so far X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:53:34 -0000 Hi, this is yet another message from me saying that I do not see enough energy in this WG. We have two alternative ways forward. Either the level of activity increases dramatically and the WG progresses towards the goals described in its charter or we close the WG. Feel free to respond to this email with your input on this issue. Nevertheless, I intend to measure the level of activity in the group not by how many responses this email gets, but by the amount of actual work that is done in the near future ;o) Thanks, Gonzalo On 28/01/2011 2:15 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: > Hi, > > as I indicated before, we need more activity in this group in order to > make some progress. > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > > _______________________________________________ > salud mailing list > salud@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud > From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Wed Apr 13 02:21:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C8DFE06D4 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 02:21:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hh6SzhpVQH9j for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 02:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59D22E0674 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 02:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so379288vws.31 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 02:21:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=XzwiWBuyDEUbOAVYEvdwyCn7wEEMAydzhJ/1Su/s8KM=; b=J9U9kUkFIseL8ZAlQbtwWqPOT9SqhC6f5BXs4TRPouvfuiDztkjTnOU0hoAYRC9Kya Z+9oaeymKIlGUXkc0XkmFO/Xe6Q5+AfZmgIwAB/7cWZJi3gKg16u8DUuNmbXA2DFOcqs 0L74I840LhxSPGzVZTL4toS8tplCvBvapbdAg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=AoV+x1wEAUhAK7f+lt8vVL2uEGlx9pzF/tidiaYxhHBa1/NViap2I8b9QGAPo8OMVi mPwZR1jyhcfJb3Z9R2ULQbxaezbQRL9OJbWP1r6+pP95FgjqPngs1TN9vaETYXJEb4Oc 7EmiDd2LZa5XQBriw3HWTeLKHDq+MPIXNRCeE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.173.108 with SMTP id bj12mr2216311vdc.177.1302686511695; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 02:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.163.41 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 02:21:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DA44B49.4030608@ericsson.com> References: <4C90B977.3000608@ericsson.com> <4CE52F78.7050706@ericsson.com> <4D42B356.7080704@ericsson.com> <4DA44B49.4030608@ericsson.com> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:21:51 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: Gonzalo Camarillo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] Little activity so far X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:21:53 -0000 Gonzalo, give me 3 or 4 days to put together a new version of the draft which includes the comments received on the requirements, then I hope we can go on and progress with the syntax. We had during the end of february and march about 30 commens after Dale's LC on the requirements. I thought this was not so bad. One non -requirements issue is still open because people were busy elsewere. This is a small group with only one draft, and it is difficult to reach the same dynamic as for larger groups. Thanks a lot Laura 2011/4/12 Gonzalo Camarillo : > Hi, > > this is yet another message from me saying that I do not see enough > energy in this WG. > > We have two alternative ways forward. Either the level of activity > increases dramatically and the WG progresses towards the goals described > in its charter or we close the WG. > > Feel free to respond to this email with your input on this issue. > Nevertheless, I intend to measure the level of activity in the group not > by how many responses this email gets, but by the amount of actual work > that is done in the near future ;o) > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > > > On 28/01/2011 2:15 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >> Hi, >> >> as I indicated before, we need more activity in this group in order to >> make some progress. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> _______________________________________________ >> salud mailing list >> salud@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud >> > > _______________________________________________ > salud mailing list > salud@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud > From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Thu Apr 14 08:00:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50C6E0699; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:00:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.162, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i014AO9y1q+m; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:00:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfc.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D5B8E070B; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:00:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.51 Message-ID: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:00:03 -0700 Cc: salud@ietf.org Subject: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:00:04 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Sip ALerting for User Devices Working Group of the IETF. Title : Alert-Info URNs for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Author(s) : L. Liess, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Pages : 24 Date : 2011-04-14 The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by the UA when the user is alerted. This is done using the Alert-Info header field. However, the reference addresses only network resources with specific rendering properties. There is currently no support for predefined standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without being tied to a particular rendering. To overcome this limitation and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in SIP Alert-Info header fields is defined in this specification. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ 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: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2011-04-14075300.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Fri Apr 15 02:40:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9284E0693 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:40:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xyc7Y5Cgc1Qr for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EFBE0664 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:40:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so2464628vws.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:40:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=zLP0yBPIEN6LXCAKtTjoC7PzO3EUq5ucEPsTFEf7khA=; b=KrGsQ1Q1cGLOCJ/SB5wyVsV7h3peBC+0Rof7pW7O5VyYhqqnL/RQ0ZprBQtbOu8LPU 5Owmrno4Rlj2FEuXJJr3VmBv/OuKBJ701jSpxZVqfI9walgFUdvOQksZHKvYgkwZuiz0 YDfV/E0Hks0pIMKx8rMXUj3m/+vtbIfEa/Ucs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=tiWzU7Nrc9Oinzr+QAMXveiJoIQShIr5tChMuuEjZdns1NDQAZedATYzLB2MtNwVLX C3AJ/sqCzZ0Bo5axIn6p8amKTtMPAYcz9+13mDAR7ZAwEKe3IA1mfPMJVEwFC73CzVO+ iujRbdP0zNVezSHxzfZEAGwdDDgb/oqnbsXg8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.177.9 with SMTP id cm9mr1084260vdc.217.1302860408193; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:40:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.163.41 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:40:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:40:08 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: salud@ietf.org, Dale Worley Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [salud] draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:40:14 -0000 Hi, I submitted a new version of the draft. The new version of the draft includes changes according to John's and Dale's comments. I did not include any change concerning Dale's first and last comment in http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/salud/current/msg00071.html . We had no consensus on how to handle these comments. The first comment also has a dependency to the shared-appearences draft. @Dale. I think we should have a Webex during the first or second week of May to go through the requirements and use cases and clarify what to do with your open comments so we can finish the requirements and use cases. We also should begin the discussion on the main items, single vs. multiple URNs and combinations of URNs. Thanks a lot Laura From john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com Fri Apr 15 02:51:18 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941CCE07C1 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:51:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.919 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.680, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0xb+0m8i0nr9 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:51:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail182.messagelabs.com (mail182.messagelabs.com [85.158.139.83]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8EFA8E07BF for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:51:17 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-182.messagelabs.com!1302861076!5103472!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [62.134.46.9] Received: (qmail 10564 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2011 09:51:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO senmx11-mx) (62.134.46.9) by server-3.tower-182.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 15 Apr 2011 09:51:16 -0000 Received: from MCHP063A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.61]) by senmx11-mx (Server) with ESMTP id 503C91EB83ED for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:51:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.55]) by MCHP063A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.61]) with mapi; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:51:16 +0200 From: "Elwell, John" To: "salud@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:51:14 +0200 Thread-Topic: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Thread-Index: Acv6tKmQmj9o1/r4TDGMcbKmIhatggAkv/bQ Message-ID: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:51:18 -0000 I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP Alert-Info header field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see this in the head= er. 2. Section 1.3 seems to suggest that "indication" and "identifier" mean the= same thing. Both terms are used extensively throughout the document. If th= ey mean the same thing, please use just one term. If they mean different th= ings, define them. 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, not a negotiation capability. The mechanism will not require an indication to depend on context provided by a previous indication in either direction." Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? John =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: salud-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:salud-bounces@ietf.org]=20 > On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Sent: 14 April 2011 16:00 > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: salud@ietf.org > Subject: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 > Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Sip ALerting for User=20 > Devices Working Group of the IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Alert-Info URNs for the Session=20 > Initiation Protocol (SIP) > Author(s) : L. Liess, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt > Pages : 24 > Date : 2011-04-14 >=20 > The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to > provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by the UA when > the user is alerted. This is done using the Alert-Info header field. > However, the reference addresses only network resources with specific > rendering properties. There is currently no support for predefined > standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting > situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without > being tied to a particular rendering. To overcome this limitation > and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in SIP > Alert-Info header fields is defined in this specification. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-salud-alert-inf > o-urns-01.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > = From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Fri Apr 15 08:41:21 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CCE6E070B for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:41:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.477 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.477 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aFSRYU0X8h4q for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7486E069F for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so2727344vxg.31 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:41:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LfMfLeWglRMt7A1eE37qyWAwHjFhgWcLcR85FLZGq4U=; b=VmQXBpJVhTaYsV1erPbuwnoVeL+LIfiaMSZRsH0ln3MCrf78xI/dFw1jjksTUUBFNl b/9TkWA8f+irm9P1zIXCtq5eXa1n68tQ9v7XkYS4HW8ysfgpgzwCBwjf8TvJzxSswuJU D86UMFHx+sPhIBFpu+rmJXS6RW0T7S4eB5UxM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vFKeRPNBMbvqRQPN2JWuxYwZlm9rQ7yUI2MoeOfnsL465L0S1c6qfDRKioZUVeYX8u jzygdOgN7dqrOhPDMi+sM8y77JldSJSjWGEp46dlsQgf4FG8mgFmrR1nb185jVdmrOdu gUPyg5LhN04qE3+AEP6Jvg82eMbV6GAhVeVqQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.177.9 with SMTP id cm9mr1596090vdc.217.1302882076033; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.163.41 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:41:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:41:15 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: "Elwell, John" , Dale Worley Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:41:21 -0000 John, Thanks a lot for the comments. 2011/4/15 Elwell, John : > I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: > > 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP Alert-Info header > =A0 field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in > =A0 all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." > This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see this in the he= ader. [LL] I think you are right. Do I have to ask the SIPCORE chairs or Gonzalo before doing this? > > 2. Section 1.3 seems to suggest that "indication" and "identifier" mean t= he same thing. Both terms are used extensively throughout the document. If = they mean the same thing, please use just one term. If they mean different = things, define them. [LL] They are the same thing and I would prefer to use "indication". Just that Dale has to agree to this because the text was in one of his comments. @Dale: Is this OK for you? > > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, not > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require an > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous indication in > =A0 either direction." > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about splitting it into REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. Regards Laura > > John > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: salud-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:salud-bounces@ietf.org] >> On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >> Sent: 14 April 2011 16:00 >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Cc: salud@ietf.org >> Subject: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >> Internet-Drafts directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Sip ALerting for User >> Devices Working Group of the IETF. >> >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Alert-Info URNs for the Session >> Initiation Protocol (SIP) >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : L. Liess, et al. >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-0= 1.txt >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 24 >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2011-04-14 >> >> The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to >> provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by the UA when >> the user is alerted. =A0This is done using the Alert-Info header field. >> However, the reference addresses only network resources with specific >> rendering properties. =A0There is currently no support for predefined >> standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting >> situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without >> being tied to a particular rendering. =A0To overcome this limitation >> and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in SIP >> Alert-Info header fields is defined in this specification. >> >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-salud-alert-inf >> o-urns-01.txt >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >> Internet-Draft. >> > _______________________________________________ > salud mailing list > salud@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud > From pkyzivat@cisco.com Fri Apr 15 08:52:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0ABD13000F for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:52:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.427 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.427 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.172, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xERK+zwuEmNc for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:52:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B88813000D for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:52:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; l=662; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1302882721; x=1304092321; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Jr4FNoOj1a4E2r11yNjXZ7xUkbRVqv1IHmUE2qpxmb0=; b=bnOE8k3sjaIYaSzj6UBSHUa9nKOwjamonFVzwtz8uJKzSRm+xFy/04UU YtcAEcOEoR4tXHSjK9aIFmo0mJGgyHBgdvNWrJLw62xl9bALBuic4pDlw v6oFy5ToEzUQ8L/VJz/hKg7M9Lgr3MZ3YU0l/4R0GFTypNpP69P10WMgV E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoIAIloqE2tJXHB/2dsb2JhbACYRI1Ad6c+nH6FbgSNeIN0 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,219,1301875200"; d="scan'208";a="283023128" Received: from rcdn-core2-6.cisco.com ([173.37.113.193]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Apr 2011 15:52:00 +0000 Received: from [161.44.182.250] (dhcp-161-44-182-250.cisco.com [161.44.182.250]) by rcdn-core2-6.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p3FFq08p019684 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:52:00 GMT Message-ID: <4DA869A0.1030300@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:52:00 -0400 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: salud@ietf.org References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:52:06 -0000 On 4/15/2011 11:41 AM, Laura Liess wrote: > John, > > Thanks a lot for the comments. > > 2011/4/15 Elwell, John: >> I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: >> >> 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP Alert-Info header >> field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in >> all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." >> This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see this in the header. > > [LL] I think you are right. Do I have to ask the SIPCORE chairs or > Gonzalo before doing this? Gonzalo I think. Thanks, Paul From john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com Fri Apr 15 09:14:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968A8E091B for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:14:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.958 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.958 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.359, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mi-FkP7hlsS4 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail216.messagelabs.com (mail216.messagelabs.com [85.158.143.99]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3147DE091A for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:14:15 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com X-Msg-Ref: server-6.tower-216.messagelabs.com!1302884054!2187924!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [62.134.46.10] Received: (qmail 8212 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2011 16:14:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO senmx12-mx) (62.134.46.10) by server-6.tower-216.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 15 Apr 2011 16:14:14 -0000 Received: from MCHP063A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.61]) by senmx12-mx (Server) with ESMTP id 5D38E23F03DB; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:14:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.55]) by MCHP063A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.61]) with mapi; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:14:14 +0200 From: "Elwell, John" To: Laura Liess , Dale Worley Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:14:12 +0200 Thread-Topic: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Thread-Index: Acv7g5EShIUZQ4y6Qd+oh99mQALEdQABEtUw Message-ID: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 16:14:20 -0000 =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Laura Liess [mailto:laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com]=20 > Sent: 15 April 2011 16:41 > To: Elwell, John; Dale Worley > Cc: salud@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [salud] I-D=20 > Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >=20 > John, >=20 > Thanks a lot for the comments. >=20 > 2011/4/15 Elwell, John : > > I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: > > > > 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP=20 > Alert-Info header > > =A0 field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in > > =A0 all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." > > This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see=20 > this in the header. >=20 > [LL] I think you are right. Do I have to ask the SIPCORE chairs or > Gonzalo before doing this? [JRE] Good question. The SALUD charter doesn't really extend beyond definin= g the URN scheme. Seems like an AD question. Personally I would hope we can= do it here in SALUD but perhaps make SIPCORE aware. John > > > > 2. Section 1.3 seems to suggest that "indication" and=20 > "identifier" mean the same thing. Both terms are used=20 > extensively throughout the document. If they mean the same=20 > thing, please use just one term. If they mean different=20 > things, define them. > [LL] They are the same thing and I would prefer to use "indication". > Just that Dale has to agree to this because the text was in one of his > comments. > @Dale: Is this OK for you? >=20 > > > > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication=20 > capability, not > > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require an > > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous=20 > indication in > > =A0 either direction." > > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? > [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about splitting it into > REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not > renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. >=20 > Regards > Laura >=20 > > > > John > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: salud-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:salud-bounces@ietf.org] > >> On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > >> Sent: 14 April 2011 16:00 > >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > >> Cc: salud@ietf.org > >> Subject: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt > >> > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line > >> Internet-Drafts directories. > >> This draft is a work item of the Sip ALerting for User > >> Devices Working Group of the IETF. > >> > >> > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Alert-Info URNs for the Sessio= n > >> Initiation Protocol (SIP) > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : L. Liess, et al. > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns= -01.txt > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 24 > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2011-04-14 > >> > >> The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to > >> provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by=20 > the UA when > >> the user is alerted. =A0This is done using the Alert-Info=20 > header field. > >> However, the reference addresses only network resources=20 > with specific > >> rendering properties. =A0There is currently no support for predefined > >> standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting > >> situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without > >> being tied to a particular rendering. =A0To overcome this limitation > >> and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in SIP > >> Alert-Info header fields is defined in this specification. > >> > >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-salud-alert-inf > >> o-urns-01.txt > >> > >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >> > >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > >> Internet-Draft. > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > salud mailing list > > salud@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud > > > = From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Mon Apr 18 00:06:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE8AE0655 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:06:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yP+DV1zfkuto for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB734E06D3 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so4123791vxg.31 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:06:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=YbZgwpICV+KaJ38wQbARpBPRRfhq2HMxwM9dIxnybdY=; b=L1qNR1bnOb2wSWvRtrkme3DQci5DafbyLTAleqwOin6rIG7mUyPlXSa5wsNX48Yu0f ZSc8Ev1mq/Em46u7y+DQZio9BA+vd3Nw9G9CfEWx9jxAz3ANnS8k+3U3IoF8YaLjSJvd UwZqCStSPoV5YOpkLdHqTD0dFsIwEX67ZvHXo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AYR5wsLLvtXmw8YK6SeMHTIujMpJeM/QvGOd44lXUJ7nMzOrCQW8uAg+c0Lq5X2cAm 0Gq+bbxFXexUcu0n4ThUI3rpRgLscjfdi7cJr7qKHfz7LkhOr0Zr/n85vHvmA4Ou6n8a FrFTwosv8jgbzwmA7+uqSAXMZ7ZFw/L6V1Dco= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.65.106 with SMTP id w10mr6615418vds.137.1303110406161; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.163.41 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:06:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DA869A0.1030300@cisco.com> References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> <4DA869A0.1030300@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:06:46 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: Paul Kyzivat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: salud@ietf.org Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 07:06:51 -0000 Thank you. I will ask Gonzalo. Laura 2011/4/15 Paul Kyzivat : > > > On 4/15/2011 11:41 AM, Laura Liess wrote: >> >> John, >> >> Thanks a lot for the comments. >> >> 2011/4/15 Elwell, John: >>> >>> I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: >>> >>> 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP Alert-Info header >>> =A0 field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in >>> =A0 all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." >>> This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see this in the >>> header. >> >> [LL] I think you are right. Do I have to ask the SIPCORE chairs or >> Gonzalo before doing this? > > Gonzalo I think. > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Thanks, > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Paul > _______________________________________________ > salud mailing list > salud@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud > From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Mon Apr 18 00:08:36 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2445EE06D3 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:08:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.227 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4c0LS1o-xoH9 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A131FE0655 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so4124790vxg.31 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:08:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1pkTrDEDgLO8BrKZt7otaVzaayfv1u7mi1YmtKAgfa0=; b=OXVkhyqnWf6QdaEPNdscd3wDtdA4YDoYqCv/KVhHd0xB/QnHnLSLIKB8cXgJhAwJy0 GOxijOoL9aIqmtWnI5iZcRR9u+vJkp9joeIK9cWGGzPtYq0M+0dxnQSMKTzSbAKOHj// NIYotnJPjR2LNtLXHi8tec5jP1vY7mQUJISh8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=weoZbEwjAFLs5531cb8dm9l78ZCjze58/SN91UXej1HVy7SuuOShxfcS/isL9X2cQy gVWcQCOilxWA6gNscSIIVZZbjj6g2UB7ctuK+vnWMRqJ3iA5lEn/W0roIHfPyQ/4h8pl p7jXhG5d5MphxJSuV0o4fw0y40mitVNnsIPbA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.173.108 with SMTP id bj12mr2585491vdc.177.1303110511343; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.163.41 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:08:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:08:31 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: "Elwell, John" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 07:08:36 -0000 2011/4/15 Elwell, John : > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Laura Liess [mailto:laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com] >> Sent: 15 April 2011 16:41 >> To: Elwell, John; Dale Worley >> Cc: salud@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [salud] I-D >> Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >> >> John, >> >> Thanks a lot for the comments. >> >> 2011/4/15 Elwell, John : >> > I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: >> > >> > 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP >> Alert-Info header >> > =A0 field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in >> > =A0 all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." >> > This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see >> this in the header. >> >> [LL] I think you are right. Do I have to ask the SIPCORE chairs or >> Gonzalo before doing this? > [JRE] Good question. The SALUD charter doesn't really extend beyond defin= ing the URN scheme. Seems like an AD question. Personally I would hope we c= an do it here in SALUD but perhaps make SIPCORE aware. > I will ask Gonzalo, as Paul said. Thanks Laura > John > > >> > >> > 2. Section 1.3 seems to suggest that "indication" and >> "identifier" mean the same thing. Both terms are used >> extensively throughout the document. If they mean the same >> thing, please use just one term. If they mean different >> things, define them. >> [LL] =A0They are the same thing and I would prefer to use "indication". >> Just that Dale has to agree to this because the text was in one of his >> comments. >> @Dale: Is this OK for you? >> >> > >> > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication >> capability, not >> > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require an >> > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous >> indication in >> > =A0 either direction." >> > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? >> [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about splitting it into >> REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not >> renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. >> >> Regards >> Laura >> >> > >> > John >> > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: salud-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:salud-bounces@ietf.org] >> >> On Behalf Of Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >> >> Sent: 14 April 2011 16:00 >> >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> >> Cc: salud@ietf.org >> >> Subject: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >> >> >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >> >> Internet-Drafts directories. >> >> This draft is a work item of the Sip ALerting for User >> >> Devices Working Group of the IETF. >> >> >> >> >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Alert-Info URNs for the Sessi= on >> >> Initiation Protocol (SIP) >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : L. Liess, et al. >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urn= s-01.txt >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 24 >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2011-04-14 >> >> >> >> The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) supports the capability to >> >> provide a reference to a specific rendering to be used by >> the UA when >> >> the user is alerted. =A0This is done using the Alert-Info >> header field. >> >> However, the reference addresses only network resources >> with specific >> >> rendering properties. =A0There is currently no support for predefined >> >> standard identifiers for describing the semantics of the alerting >> >> situation or the characteristics of the alerting signal, without >> >> being tied to a particular rendering. =A0To overcome this limitation >> >> and support new applications, a new family of URNs for use in SIP >> >> Alert-Info header fields is defined in this specification. >> >> >> >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-salud-alert-inf >> >> o-urns-01.txt >> >> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> >> >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >> >> Internet-Draft. >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > salud mailing list >> > salud@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud >> > >> From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Mon Apr 18 04:21:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABFDE06E0 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:21:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.177 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V3VxQyEqHkf3 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FA86E00BE for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so4284557vxg.31 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gHGPSzLOseDPgAZV53er6iwkDKokWXJ7hCwfe7Fxeqo=; b=xFZXlQj2VPGuecxzLisZJul5k/bey13MU6EA83Y9oxgBhfD+j9g0pe3jbhH3tFW2VO xYIfqiYDRvv+rpTamaM5j81uRZLZJQwmobOFs8OgttebRELHz9/AJbHHQWMvYagTe6OY nEzN3djj1vOSc4F946jc7xTaFh1NBEKLMcM1A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=rjDLH5NybxYtic3YtAyxWK4gchrcDqZY6ZjJGWOlg4eb072iOKHs86123Zp5QpTn3Y 5BYm3TfkxI3Cdv+0PfSZUae6xgyN4U62qJcCAgK1r30EAXeFzIJo8KPbmExHdiqw+sx9 RiqvO1Psyd1sazqeHtvVVJP5x1ySacfH6qs90= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.65.106 with SMTP id w10mr6933202vds.137.1303125710471; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.163.41 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:21:50 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: Gonzalo Camarillo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: salud@ietf.org Subject: [salud] Question about what should be in the header of the draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:21:56 -0000 Gonzalo, John asked me to indicate in the header of the draft that this draft updates the RFC 3261, because it allows the SIP Alert-Info header in all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response). Is this O= K ? Thanks a lot Laura ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul Kyzivat Date: 2011/4/15 Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt To: salud@ietf.org On 4/15/2011 11:41 AM, Laura Liess wrote: > > John, > > Thanks a lot for the comments. > > 2011/4/15 Elwell, John: >> >> I just skimmed the diffs and noticed a few things: >> >> 1. "This specification changes the usage of the SIP Alert-Info header >> =A0 field defined in the [RFC3261] by additionally allowing its use in >> =A0 all provisional responses to INVITE (except the 100 response)." >> This seems to suggest it updates RFC 3261, but I don't see this in the h= eader. > > [LL] I think you are right. Do I have to ask the SIPCORE chairs or > Gonzalo before doing this? Gonzalo I think. =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Thanks, =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Paul _______________________________________________ salud mailing list salud@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/salud From dworley@avaya.com Tue Apr 19 10:41:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfc.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C61E069C for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:41:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MBam23ec2Y4F for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C62E071E for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:41:23 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAJgtcU3GmAcF/2dsb2JhbACmZHSkegKZF4VhBJAM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,240,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="185072894" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 19 Apr 2011 13:41:22 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,240,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="610552054" Received: from dc-us1hcex2.us1.avaya.com (HELO DC-US1HCEX2.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.21]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 19 Apr 2011 13:41:22 -0400 Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([169.254.2.201]) by DC-US1HCEX2.global.avaya.com ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:41:21 -0400 From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" To: Laura Liess , "Elwell, John" Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:41:00 -0400 Thread-Topic: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Thread-Index: Acv7g4+nz5upmKHETjGJmmJzqqjB/QDNWLKQ Message-ID: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:41:27 -0000 > From: Laura Liess >=20 > > From: Elwell, John > > > > 2. Section 1.3 seems to suggest that "indication" and "identifier" > > mean the same thing. Both terms are used extensively throughout the > > document. If they mean the same thing, please use just one term. If > > they mean different things, define them. >=20 > [LL] They are the same thing and I would prefer to use "indication". > Just that Dale has to agree to this because the text was in one of his > comments. >=20 > @Dale: Is this OK for you? Yes, I have no objection to whatever terminology you think is best. > > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, no= t > > a negotiation capability. The mechanism will not require an > > indication to depend on context provided by a previous indication in > > either direction." > > > > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? >=20 > [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about splitting it into > REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not > renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. You could consider it to be two requirements, or as one requirement which defines the independence of interpreting an indication from all external context. It doesn't matter much which way we do it. Dale From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Tue Apr 26 01:41:31 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E51FAE0663 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:41:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Dfl-PU01Py3D for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29693E064B for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so378849vxg.31 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:41:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=g5XwBlANZrYnlYQTd/bEBGUtdq6IM8YTOwZMMnaRWcE=; b=f7j2/uD/fV0FD0IyKrfiicjjjBL6fbaiokRcHtYn/JrPvGJNwF/kHxUugF6t5MRhgC ZFnI+dOBXlOP+p/vCcmIoUCRLVkQ0fMxiuaGHOAvD8uTBHGNAXm6AEdYTxFKgoGFQkbh rPVtO3zwYX1xWsTPv7DKgCkidMNwcGKmw16TI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=HB/LHL8bURxtcDfa/UDwzjldNoD+6/dUUKi3UVR/Q9Lv1QyuUopMGJwlYxBJmzG/Hs 7NCFHp8jV3AhbKnQkDTGl/c7p5HzvCmypjgYOSgbUHgA+drOMqspcwoHeZYwxLbDeSUk RQibW9z+fymD0rDJf1Jhwx6I4t2e5Xm9I9Ebk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.67.73 with SMTP id l9mr701601vdt.287.1303807287533; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.166.42 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:41:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:41:27 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:41:32 -0000 Dale, > >> > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, n= ot >> > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require an >> > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous indication = in >> > =A0 either direction." >> > >> > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? >> >> [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about splitting it into >> REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not >> renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. > > You could consider it to be two requirements, or as one requirement > which defines the independence of interpreting an indication from all > external context. =A0It doesn't matter much which way we do it. [LL] "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability. The interpretation of an indication is independent from all external context, e.g. context provided by a previous or subsequent indication in either direction. " What do you think? Laura > > Dale > From john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com Tue Apr 26 02:30:01 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F82E06AC for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 02:30:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.097, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tNRM8GAxmBrI for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 02:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail216.messagelabs.com (mail216.messagelabs.com [85.158.143.99]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 98DD6E069A for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 02:30:00 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com X-Msg-Ref: server-4.tower-216.messagelabs.com!1303810199!3222215!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [62.134.46.9] Received: (qmail 1482 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2011 09:29:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO senmx11-mx) (62.134.46.9) by server-4.tower-216.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2011 09:29:59 -0000 Received: from MCHP064A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.63]) by senmx11-mx (Server) with ESMTP id F410F1EB83E1; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:29:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.55]) by MCHP064A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.63]) with mapi; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:29:59 +0200 From: "Elwell, John" To: Laura Liess , "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:29:58 +0200 Thread-Topic: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Thread-Index: AcwD7cdGSrJyYSrhQsmRag0KT0s37QABppAg Message-ID: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:30:01 -0000 =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Laura Liess [mailto:laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com]=20 > Sent: 26 April 2011 09:41 > To: Worley, Dale R (Dale) > Cc: Elwell, John; salud@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [salud] I-D=20 > Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >=20 > Dale, >=20 >=20 > > > >> > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication=20 > capability, not > >> > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require an > >> > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous=20 > indication in > >> > =A0 either direction." > >> > > >> > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? > >> > >> [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about=20 > splitting it into > >> REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not > >> renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. > > > > You could consider it to be two requirements, or as one requirement > > which defines the independence of interpreting an=20 > indication from all > > external context. =A0It doesn't matter much which way we do it. >=20 > [LL] "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication > capability. The interpretation of an indication is independent from > all external context, e.g. context provided by a previous or > subsequent indication in either direction. " >=20 > What do you think? [JRE] I think this is just trying to hide what essentially are two separate= requirements. I prefer to express it as two requirements. John >=20 > Laura > > > > Dale > > > = From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Tue Apr 26 03:02:23 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B61CE06DF for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:02:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KdUA2ataXcMr for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6675FE06C0 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so358228wyb.31 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:02:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=UF+Bxl7SO1P+YhTAXF1VCNMWQoRQKGRXjxwYMmAJmjo=; b=SnS0171bj5CwUiL7rscsl+sz3h46zTeDl4pIjx1otROFCpxLYSEARIOiMmr//qtid4 3we3Ze5bvSZC+3HTf/qG4TUIcolvrO35x92Dyglnx++wvsRhDr7vqNj9zA7ytexZH2cG TcKlaraXrEcagif9yUhmm378heBfcjMWqXKpU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=v50yWUxEUpkMVFtPumYzE+lbOUYDYLz1YTb6pFkh+jEMcygwXQy4nJ1u8OHrJb7oUn TsvZOw9dcba11gQl9eL/6Lo8rgCF6PJcyAW7lqO4/nXtMnyOxRDIIiJyPWhCXFmf6uZk y6Fl6q233CAZUAiqz8YdIxXCspiyhqZgXhODE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.217.2.202 with SMTP id p52mr560753wes.28.1303812141403; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:02:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.155.67 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:02:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:02:21 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: "Elwell, John" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:02:23 -0000 John, 2011/4/26 Elwell, John : > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Laura Liess [mailto:laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com] >> Sent: 26 April 2011 09:41 >> To: Worley, Dale R (Dale) >> Cc: Elwell, John; salud@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [salud] I-D >> Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >> >> Dale, >> >> >> > >> >> > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication >> capability, not >> >> > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require an >> >> > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous >> indication in >> >> > =A0 either direction." >> >> > >> >> > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? >> >> >> >> [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about >> splitting it into >> >> REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I would not >> >> renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. >> > >> > You could consider it to be two requirements, or as one requirement >> > which defines the independence of interpreting an >> indication from all >> > external context. =A0It doesn't matter much which way we do it. >> >> [LL] =A0"REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication >> capability. The interpretation of an indication is independent from >> all external context, e.g. context provided by a previous or >> subsequent indication in either direction. =A0" >> >> What do you think? > [JRE] I think this is just trying to hide what essentially are two separa= te requirements. I prefer to express it as two requirements. > [LL] "REQ-7a: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, not a negotiation capability. REQ-7b: The mechanism will not require an indication to depend on context provided by a previous indication in either direction." I just splitt REQ-7. If people agree, I would renumber the requirements when we are finished with changing them. Is this OK for you? Laura > John > > >> >> Laura >> > >> > Dale >> > >> From john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com Tue Apr 26 03:51:50 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD5BE0722 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:51:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.547 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.052, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M5ZDxAACSvrV for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail216.messagelabs.com (mail216.messagelabs.com [85.158.143.99]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 24BC8E0720 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 03:51:49 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com X-Msg-Ref: server-10.tower-216.messagelabs.com!1303815107!3237566!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [62.134.46.10] Received: (qmail 8346 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2011 10:51:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO senmx12-mx) (62.134.46.10) by server-10.tower-216.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2011 10:51:48 -0000 Received: from MCHP063A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.61]) by senmx12-mx (Server) with ESMTP id DBA7723F03DB; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:51:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.55]) by MCHP063A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.61]) with mapi; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:51:47 +0200 From: "Elwell, John" To: Laura Liess Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:51:46 +0200 Thread-Topic: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Thread-Index: AcwD+QooZggk1mkVQx2+MpTsZ4gNUAABt/9w Message-ID: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:51:50 -0000 Fine with me. John=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Laura Liess [mailto:laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com]=20 > Sent: 26 April 2011 11:02 > To: Elwell, John > Cc: Worley, Dale R (Dale); salud@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [salud] I-D=20 > Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt >=20 > John, >=20 >=20 >=20 > 2011/4/26 Elwell, John : > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Laura Liess [mailto:laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com] > >> Sent: 26 April 2011 09:41 > >> To: Worley, Dale R (Dale) > >> Cc: Elwell, John; salud@ietf.org > >> Subject: Re: [salud] I-D > >> Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt > >> > >> Dale, > >> > >> > >> > > >> >> > 3. "REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication > >> capability, not > >> >> > =A0 a negotiation capability. =A0The mechanism will not require a= n > >> >> > =A0 indication to depend on context provided by a previous > >> indication in > >> >> > =A0 either direction." > >> >> > > >> >> > Shouldn't this be two separate REQs? > >> >> > >> >> [LL] Before submitting the draft I also thougt about > >> splitting it into > >> >> REQ-7a and REQ-7b. I didn't do it but it makes sense. I=20 > would not > >> >> renumber until we are not ready with changing the requirements. > >> > > >> > You could consider it to be two requirements, or as one=20 > requirement > >> > which defines the independence of interpreting an > >> indication from all > >> > external context. =A0It doesn't matter much which way we do it. > >> > >> [LL] =A0"REQ-7: The mechanism will provide only an indication > >> capability. The interpretation of an indication is independent from > >> all external context, e.g. context provided by a previous or > >> subsequent indication in either direction. =A0" > >> > >> What do you think? > > [JRE] I think this is just trying to hide what essentially=20 > are two separate requirements. I prefer to express it as two=20 > requirements. > > > [LL] >=20 > "REQ-7a: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, not > a negotiation capability. >=20 > REQ-7b: The mechanism will not require an indication to depend on > context provided by a previous indication in > either direction." >=20 > I just splitt REQ-7. If people agree, I would renumber the > requirements when we are finished with changing them. >=20 > Is this OK for you? >=20 > Laura >=20 >=20 >=20 > > John >=20 >=20 >=20 > > > > > >> > >> Laura > >> > > >> > Dale > >> > > >> > = From dworley@avaya.com Tue Apr 26 08:44:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F75E0782 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:44:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.943 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.943 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.656, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hBHpE2qOz7Qz for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF9EE0681 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:44:58 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAFMtcU2HCzI1/2dsb2JhbACmZXSkeQKZFoVhBJAM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,268,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="243438951" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 26 Apr 2011 11:44:56 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,268,1301889600"; d="scan'208";a="643345378" Received: from dc-us1hcex2.us1.avaya.com (HELO DC-US1HCEX2.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.21]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 26 Apr 2011 11:44:56 -0400 Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([169.254.2.201]) by DC-US1HCEX2.global.avaya.com ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:44:55 -0400 From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" To: Laura Liess , "Elwell, John" Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:44:18 -0400 Thread-Topic: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt Thread-Index: AcwD+Qr0CCTsH8jDQbGbFXHQvrDM9QAL8LUI Message-ID: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:44:59 -0000 ________________________________________ From: Laura Liess [laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com] "REQ-7a: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, not a negotiation capability. REQ-7b: The mechanism will not require an indication to depend on context provided by a previous indication in either direction." _________________________________________ This formulation is fine with me. Dale From laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com Wed Apr 27 07:45:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: salud@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1904E07A9 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:45:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eZy832RMuEVP for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:45:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57FADE07A7 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:45:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so1599868vxg.31 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:45:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0fHLgQ178ulFZTw1uMSj8kRkHHrEFMxqxHHaLz0Yl+Q=; b=RQpDxBGdh44S4ZhdlQnxbQyT7eHPaGkgVfpRhnpBg0X7BCcvVX7xPJY3povVPOE3rq oCvvHqN5p1QRcok6rLhtAeKSmMEwq07O8on+4jYLppnLHhws913pafeIt41/nT+08+Qz fmIUIEL9ElIYugwWKjzFPT08F2yEWjvC7QZgo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=QwHlZ+T/Y0VVNJe9HUV1d2LpLw+9xDCA/EMQdbEQ1lYsUd8caeD+05dft0mSFQ6pL6 kexKi++CreU5wws0ZNTQqRWmS/PFkuTBTcj3BXQAb194izjGudhMH91piU2fAleXI2py V9ywfxOSnXkB9DwMGHg6BOBELlT9EDxlxU9VA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.67.73 with SMTP id l9mr3155632vdt.287.1303915530814; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.166.42 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:45:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110414150003.7381.37408.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:45:30 +0200 Message-ID: From: Laura Liess To: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" , "Elwell, John" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "salud@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [salud] I-D Action:draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-01.txt X-BeenThere: salud@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Sip ALerting for User Devices working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:45:35 -0000 John, Dale, Thank you for your comments. When I receive Gonzalo's answer concerning the update RFC 3261 I will update the draft. Laura 2011/4/26 Worley, Dale R (Dale) : > ________________________________________ > From: Laura Liess [laura.liess.dt@googlemail.com] > > "REQ-7a: The mechanism will provide only an indication capability, not > =A0a negotiation capability. > > REQ-7b: The mechanism will not require an indication to depend on > context provided by a previous indication in either direction." > _________________________________________ > > This formulation is fine with me. > > Dale >