[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Simple] MSRP chat: draft-niemi-simple-chat-04.txt



Speaking of nicknames. I don't understand why we need the MSRP extension NICKNAME to reserve a nickname for a chatroom. One would think that the nickname was reserved when the user joined the chatroom using the SIP From header field.

Thanks,
Hisham

On Mar 19, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Adam Roach wrote:

Miguel Garcia wrote:

We have just submitted a new version of the MSRP CHAT draft. This has changed substantially from earlier versions, so I wouldn't dare to summarize the changes.

-----

By and large, this is far more palatable than previous versions. I'm still a little apprehensive about the fact that we will ultimately end up with more than one way to send messages to a subset of participants (either using the "To" CPIM field *or* using the conference control protocol), but I have convinced myself that these mechanisms can probably coexist with minimal pain. Time permitting, I'll put together some suggested text for your document that talks (in general terms) about how these mechanisms can interact with each other in a sane fashion.

-----

I *do* have some of the same reservations as Paul does about nicknames.

As has been brought up repeatedly: nicknames are most emphatically not an IM-only issue. The representation of conference participants is an extremely generalizable problem, and I can't as easily see how to harmonize two different mechanisms.

In other words, the nickname reservation protocol that you're defining with the NICKNAME mechanism in MSRP shouldn't be limited to MSRP. My suggestion, for what it's worth, is that you (1) split the nickname reservation mechanism out into a separate draft, and (2) use either SIP or the XCON Conference Control Protocol instead of MSRP.

-----

As a minor additional issue: one of the fundamental precepts of the conferencing framework (even pre-XCON) was that non-conference-aware participants should be able to participate in conferences, albeit with less control of the conference itself. To that end, it would probably be beneficial to indicate how participants who don't have CPIM clients will work.

I think there are sensible ways of addressing this (e.g. if such a user sends a message, then the MSRP mixer adds a CPIM envelope that includes the user's identity, as learned during session establishment) -- they should probably be called out so that implementors of MSRP mixers will have some guidance around how they should behave..

/a

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



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