Hello Denis, The problem with the URN is that we should define the semantics for the URN structure, even if we don't define all possible values at this point. This means we should know does the value indicate a tone, call-state, or something else. Because the only realistic use case what we can imagine at this point seems to be Call Waiting, it is impossible to decide what structure the URN should use, in order to be usable also in the future, if any extensions are required. If someone could come with another use case that should be solved in this context, it would be easier to decide the URN structure. Your attempt regarding the tones was a good to that direction, but I think we should start from the use cases.
BR, Jari -----Original Message----- From: ext Alexeitsev, D [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 September, 2008 19:39 To: Mutikainen Jari (Nokia-D-MSW/Helsinki) Cc: [email protected] Subject: AW: [BLISS] Alert-Info URNs Hi Jari See inline [Jari] If I start from the top of the list, there are high tone and low tone, which I have no idea what they are. Then the next one is dial tone, so let's concentrate on this. Dial tone is a tone which is given to the caller when he/she picks up the phone, before making any dialling. By hearing the dial tone, the caller knows the "line is free". This is implemented only in legacy fixed phones, e.g. mobile phones do not have a dial tone. What meaning the sending of the dial tone could have in INVITE or 180? Once the INVITE hits the callee, the playing of the dial tone to the caller has been discontinued a long time ago. How about 180, does it indicate that the dial tone should be played to the caller in alerting phase? [DA] The tones were just for information to see if there is any interest in defining some. That is why I added them to the e-mail and not to the draft. I would like to hear more opinions on the tones issue. If there will be no support for the tone definitions I can drop them entirely from the draft. [Jari] Yes, let's use 181+180, or if that is not sufficient for some reason (which reason I would like to read from the I-D), 180 with Alert-Info with a CW indication. [DA] I generally don't think that it is a good idea to overload the semantic of the 182 to include the CW meaning. The cost of the urn implementation is minimal and an explicit solution is more future proof that an overloaded one. Let me ask the other way - what issues do you see with a urn? Greetings, Denis Alexeitsev _______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
