DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS wrote:
Dan,
I support a draft that relays a CN, but would have issues with the IETF
addressing issues WRT when billing/charging should begin and end.
IMO the ietf has no desire to be involved in deciding when billing
begins and ends. But its hard to deny that the issue isn't a subtext to
many other decisions about how things are done.
Its like some of the requests that have come from IMS - they sometimes
start out as a request that some particular artifact be added to sip,
with little explanation of why, or how it will be used, or why the
proposed mechanism was selected rather than some other one. Usually in
such cases we push back and ask for requirements that are more in the
form of use cases, so that an appropriately general mechanism can be
designed.
I think it *might* be reasonable for accounting to be taken up as a
topic by Bliss - not to standardize how it is done, but to examine a
number of use cases of differing ways that accounting might be done, and
how the protocol does/doesn't facilitate them.
Thanks,
Paul
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan York [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 7:37 PM
To: DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Henry Sinnreich;
Dean Willis; Dwight, Timothy M (Tim)
Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dan Wing
Subject: Re: [Sip] Early media as an endpoint application
Martin,
To a certain degree, some of us have already been taking on the
billing/charging question. See my P-Charge-Info draft (which I have been
told in comments today is doing something similar to the ISUP Charge
Number parameter).
Dan
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
