Pl. see inline ..
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>On Behalf Of Dale Worley
>Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 1:15 AM
>To: Shida Schubert
>Cc: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [BLISS] Use-Cases for ACH
>
>The following list of settings has been proposed. I'd like to
>make sure that there is consensus on the interaction between them.
>
>On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 11:24 +0900, Shida Schubert wrote:
>> * Call forwarding unconditional: either to voicemail or to
>any other
>> number.
>> * Call forwarding on busy: either to voicemail or to any
>other number.
>> * Call forwarding on no answer: either to voicemail or to
>any other
>> number.
>> * Call forwarding when not registered: either to voicemail
>or to any
>> other number.
>> * Call forwarding when not reachable: either to voicemail
>or to any
>> other number.
>
>My impression is that each of these "call forwarding"
>conditions can be set or cleared independently, but that
>"unconditional" overrides the other settings, and "no answer"
>is overridden by "not registered" and "not reachable" when
>they are applicable.
>
>> * Barring on all outgoing calls: on/off
>> * Barring on all outgoing international calls: on/off
>> * Barring on all outgoing calls when roaming except to own service
>> provider: on/off
>> * Barring on all incoming calls: on/off
>> * Barring on all incoming calls when roaming: on/off
>>
>> * Enabling/Disabling anonymous call reject.
>> * Enabling/Disabling the ability to reject call when call is
>> anonymous.
>> * Enabling/Disabling call-waiting
>> * Enabling/Disabling voicemail (This is probably equal to the
>> forwarding Markus presented)
>> * Enabling/Disabling DND
>
>Each of the barring and enable/disable settings seem to be independent.
>
>Call-waiting is always implemented locally on the phone in
>SIP, so I don't see the need for a SIP ACH function for it.
I think it is an ACH feature in the sense that the proxy can decide
whether to extend the call to called party or send 486 otherwise.
>
>I originally thought that barring outgoing calls is not
>sensible for ACH, because SIP ACH is a user-operated feature
>and the user has control of what calls the phone makes, but I
>was wrong -- the UA can initiate INVITEs due to in-dialog
>REFER, and so "barring outgoing" functions prevent the UA from
>automatically following REFERs that the user doesn't want followed.
>
>But it looks like "barring outgoing" functions are all
>implemented in the UA, and so aren't an ACH function per se.
>("Barring incoming" needs to be done at the proxy, so that's
>an ACH function.)
How about the case where a system administrator sets barring outgoing
calls based on Class of Service for a given user.
Sanjay
>
>Dale
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>BLISS mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
>
_______________________________________________
BLISS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
