Michael,
   I think we are making a mistake in relying on the temporary GRUU draft to 
handle privacy. There are way too many clients and Gateways already in the 
field that will not be following this draft. I think this is going to cause 
issues in deployments where there are older clients already in the field as we 
will not be able to park these existing deployments if they have privacy 
enabled. 

If the major concern is the concern is making extensions to the Dialog event 
package then maybe the solution is to create a Callpark event package. 

I realize that I seem to hold the minority opinion on interacting with clients 
and privacy, so at a minimum can we add a section on the issues with private 
clients and routing and the recommendation that all clients in the network have 
to support draft-ietf-sip-gruu-15 or there will be park failures.

I can write up the issues if that would help. 

Scott


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Procter [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 1:13 AM
To: Orton, Scott (RICH1:B620)
Cc: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BLISS] Comments 
ondraft-procter-bliss-call-park-extension-04(Privacy Interactions)

Scott,

Apologies for the delay.

2009/5/5 Scott Orton <[email protected]>:
>  Michael,
>   Can this also be addressed by subscribing to the dialog event? We 
> might want to specify in a subscription to the dialog event that we 
> want to be informed of any call parked by the subscribing user. This 
> is a change from the current draft and would require a new uri parm in 
> the Subscription. This way we can send the refer to the party being 
> parked instead of using the unsolicited refer.
>
> Scott

As Dale has just pointed out, it won't work without extensions to the dialog 
event package and/or changes to the parked UA.  Since all this is to work 
around a parked UA that doesn't provide a usable contact, it seems that putting 
more requirements on it is unlikely to make the problem better!

On balance, I think we are better off staying with the approach in the draft.  
I will be updating the draft shortly, in light of the comments raised (I am 
waiting for one last set of comments offlist).

Regards,

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

Reply via email to