Re: [Simple] Presence data model: devices

[Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat at cisco.com>]

hisham.khartabil at nokia.com wrote:
> > - A particular service maps to multiple devices, 
> > forking-style. In that 
> > case, the only advantage of having device tuples is that it 
> > allows you 
> > to enumerate the possible end points where your call might 
> > end up. You 
> > don't get a choice (although caller preferences might give 
> > you input), 
> > but you might get a hint. This, I believe, is however, much 
> > better coded 
> > as an enumeration of service capabilities as they are as likely to be 
> > constrained by the service offering as by the piece of plastic.
>
> A GRUU guarantees where a request will end up.
> You are making the assumption that tuples for the same service
> will get merged.

Henning was enumerating the cases. This one case assumes the service 
forks to multiple devices. If there is indeed to be presence information 
from each of those then yes, presumably it is being merged.

He covered the other cases as well.

> I'm not making that assumption.
> My watchers will see 2 tuples for the same service if they get
> published by different PUAs. Each tuple will have a GRUU.

Then by the terminology we are using here, they are two different 
services, not one.

> It will then be helpful to have device characteristics for that
> service and the GRUU will get you to that device.

Because they are separate services, we are back at the degenerate case 
where service = device, and "device characteristics" can be associated 
with the service.

	Paul


_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple