[Sipping] RE: Comments on draft-elwell-sipping-redirection-reason-02.txt

["Elwell, John" <john.elwell at siemens.com>]

Gonzalo,

Because that doesn't work when a 3xx is used - 302 does not capture the fact
that it was because of busy, say. Also not all reasons can be represented by
SIP response codes. I am currently writing a new (00) draft along with some
other people. This will propose a different mechanism but will still require
a new namespace to reflect different service retargeting reasons. Hoping to
hit the cut-off date for Vancouver.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:Gonzalo.Camarillo at ericsson.com] 
> Sent: 28 September 2005 14:23
> To: sipping
> Cc: Elwell, John; r.jesske at t-com.net; joanne at avaya.com
> Subject: Comments on draft-elwell-sipping-redirection-reason-02.txt
> 
> Hi,
> 
> some comments on the following draft:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-elwell-sipping-redir
> ection-reason-02.txt
> 
> Why do you need a new namespace for the Reason header field (i.e.,
> redirection) if what you are reporting seems to be the 
> reception of SIP
> status codes?
> 
> Let's take the flow in Section 6.2:
> 
>             Alice            Proxy           Bob              Gateway
>               |                |              |                   |
>               |    INVITE F1   |              |                   |
>               |--------------->|  INVITE F3   |                   |
>               |                |------------->|                   |
>               |(100 Trying) F2 |              |                   |
>               |<---------------|              |                   |
>               |                |  486 Busy    |                   |
>               |                |   here F4    |                   |
>               |                |<-------------|                   |
>               |                |    ACK F5    |                   |
>               |                |------------->|                   |
>               |                |              |    INVITE F6      |
>               |                |--------------------------------->|
> 
> 
> The entry in the History-Info header field in F6 should 
> contain a Reason
> of 486 Busy, because that is what was received from Bob... 
> but instead,
> you propose a new namespace to say exactly the same thing (i.e., "Call
> Forward Busy").
> 
> What do you gain by defining the new namespace if you are conveying
> information that was actually received in a SIP status code?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gonzalo
> 

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sip at ietf.org for new developments of core SIP