During design team discussions on Automatic Call Handling (ACH), a
question arose concerning the impact of B2BUAs on ACH.

At present, the ACH draft (draft-ietf-bliss-ach-analysis-00) discusses
ACH at UAs and ACH at proxies, and interactions between these. In
principle the discussion on ACH at proxies applies equally to ACH at
B2BUAs, where B2BUAs perform the role of domain proxy.

The issue that was raised concerned other B2BUAs on the path of a call,
either between the UAS and the proxy or between the proxy and the UAC.
In the first case these might have impact on information between the UAS
and the proxy, which the proxy needs in order to perform ACH
successfully. In the second case it might have impact on information
sent to the UAC for delivery to the calling user.

One such issue is the HERFP issue, where there is a forking B2BUA on the
path and as a result only one of several final response codes can be
sent backwards. However, in my opinion this is no different from the
case of a forking proxy on the path. The next version of the ACH
analysis draft will mention the HERFP issue.

However, the point was made that there may be other types of behaviour,
specific to certain types of B2BUA, which might have an impact. These
are to do with B2BUAs that fork but hide from the upstream side the
multiple early dialogs that are generated on the downstream side. I will
leave the originator of these comments to expand further on this.

The charter of BLISS/ACH (or indeed the charter of BLISS) does not
require us to address B2BUA issues. Also, certain B2BUA behaviours can
impact other aspects of SIP, not specifically ACH. Furthermore, B2BUAs
vary widely in their behaviour and we cannot hope to address all
possible architectures. However, it might be beneficial to mention any
particular behaviours that are known to cause problems for ACH, even if
we don't attempt to solve such problems.

Comments?

John

_______________________________________________
BLISS mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss

Reply via email to