Re: Is cpim-srv document necessary at all? (Re: NAPTR and CPIM)

Thanos Diacakis wrote:
> Understood, thanks!  Just to restate briefly:
> 
> The flaw in the argument is that receiver's protocols cannot be used to
> locate the receiver as only the receiver can translate the im: / pres: URI
> in its own schema, something that is required before one can use the
> receiver's schema.

Right.

> 
> I now see the clarification we need to add (maybe in the form of some
> scenarios in or around Section 3), to get the SRV resolution in context:
> 
> Four things need to be done for two CPP/CPIM compiant systems to
> interoperate, when they do not speak the same protocol.  (It is assumed that
> the originating system has a client request containing an im: or pres: URI
> or has translated the URI within a client request to the im: or pres: URI.)
> 
> (a)  locate destination of originating request (in original protocol)
> (b) translate request to receiver's native protocol
> (c)  locate destination of translated request (in receiver's protocol) and
>     send request
> (d) translate im: / pres: to receiver's native URI (always done at receiver)
> 
> There are four general scenarios (mapped to the above 4 steps):
> 
> Scenario 1 (Originator translates)
>   (a) skipped
>   (b) Originator translates protocol
>   (c) Originator uses SRV to locate destination of translated request and
>     send request
>   (d) Receiver translates URI schema
> 
> Scenario 2 (Originator's intermediary translates)
>   (a) Intermediary located using originator's protocol or manual
>     configuration
>   (b) Intermediary translates
>   (c) Intermediary uses SRV to locate destination of translated request and
>     send request
>   (d) Receiver translates URI schema
> 
> Scenario 3 (Receiver's intermediary translates)
>   (a) Intermediary located using SRV
>   (b) Intermediary translates
>   (c) Intermediary located receiver using manually or otherwise configured
>     data and send request
>   (d) Receiver translates URI schema
> 
> Scenario 4 (Receiver translates)
>   (a) Receiver located using SRV
>   (b) Receiver translates protocol
>   (c) skipped
>   (d) Receiver translates URI schema
> 

I am sure there are many other architectures that can be used here. I 
would prefer that the srv spec merely document the piece we need to 
standardize - the means by which a client takes an IM/PRES URI and 
figures out where to send it.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
[email protected]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com




  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]