Re: Overlap dialing user experience (Re: I-D Action: Newdraft - draft-bellis-enum-send-n-00)

Even if we should send a 484 back, how do we know to send that vs. a 480/604/whatever based on ENUM DNS not-found/unused responses, or even just alternate route it to the PSTN?

-hadriel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 6:24 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Enum] Overlap dialing user experience (Re: I-D Action:
> Newdraft - draft-bellis-enum-send-n-00)
>
>    From: "Pete Cordell" <[email protected]>
>
>    Another option may be to reject the INVITE with some kind of message (I
>    guess 4xx, but could it be some kind of moved 3xx type thing?) that
> says
>    insufficient digits and don't try to contact me again until you have n
> more
>    digits.
>
> RFC 3261, section 21.4.22: 484 Address Incomplete
>
>    The server received a request with a Request-URI that was incomplete.
>    Additional information SHOULD be provided in the reason phrase.
>
>       This status code allows overlapped dialing.  With overlapped
>       dialing, the client does not know the length of the dialing
>       string.  It sends strings of increasing lengths, prompting the
>       user for more input, until it no longer receives a 484 (Address
>       Incomplete) status response.
>
> If we want to send partial-dial-string queries into the network, as
> in Otmar's example, we might as well use INVITE and 484 responses as
> they are already defined.  The refinement would be to be able to
> provide information as to the minimum number of additional digits
> needed in the 484 response.
>
> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> enum mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum