RE: : ISSUE: SIP-User-Data AVP is mandatory in PPR

Thanks.

I still think that it would be better if all the remaining differences
are checked with the objective of having just one Diameter application
definition.  That seems to be technically an easy thing to do, but 
most likely a procedural nightmare (because it could mean e.g. changes 
both in Cx and the draft and an agreement in 3GPP to adopt the RFC 
before the approval).
Anyway, not knowing how bad that could get, I personally think it is 
worth trying.  I am sorry that this didn't come up sooner.

German.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miguel Garcia [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: jueves, 27 de octubre de 2005 14:55
> To: German Blanco (E2/EEM)
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AAA-WG]: ISSUE: SIP-User-Data AVP is mandatory in PPR
> 
> 
> Ok, I will change the text according to the suggestion.
> 
> /Miguel
> 
> German Blanco (E2/EEM) wrote:
> 
> > Description of issue: More information than required in the PPR
> > Submitter name: German Blanco
> > Submitter email address: [email protected]
> > Date first submitted: 27 Oct 05
> > Document: sip
> > Comment type: T
> > Priority: 1
> > Sections: 7.11
> > Rationale/Explanation of issue: It is specified that the PPR command
> > contains at least one SIP-User-Data AVP with the user 
> profile, however,
> > it is possible that only the charging addresses included in the 
> > SIP-Accounting-Information AVP change.  In that case, the 
> Diameter server
> > would be forcing the client to parse the information included in the
> > SIP-User-Data AVP, only to find out that there are no changes.
> > 
> > Requested change: Change the message format so that SIP-User-Data is
> > optional.
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
> sip:[email protected]
> Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland
> 
>