Re: Controversial: Have SIMPLE reached is goal? Or is it an IETF failure?

On Oct 15, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Brian McColgan wrote:

> My analysis indicates RLMI doesn't scale, but you/AG allude to an interop issue with buddy lists.  Can you be more specific and outline the issue?

More specific. In SIP SIMPLE client Presence API we defined Group, Contact and Policy classes each of them with add/delete/update methods and eight notifications in total to manage the address book. Subscribing to Presence for a contact and granting access to our own presence information are booleans that can be set for each contact.  To achieve this simplicity, we had to write about 15K lines of code in a high level programing language.

We do not have an IETF definition of such address book API, that any programmer would understand, what we have instead are a number of XML payloads, several event packages and xcap applications. Glueing all of them is  up to the developers and they end up in different places as you have heard already from several developers. Secondly, without being able to control the behavior of the server side, there is little chance a generic SIMPLE client would work with any SIMPLE server as the assumption are different and the incapability of the server to support same features used by the client will render the client useless. We could only do this because we were able to develop at the same time both the presence client and presence agent side (OpenSIPS and OpenXCAP). 

XMPP has this approach where and both server and clients can implement the same addressbook api without running into any interoperability issues.

Adrian


> In IMS, they are using pre-defined (i.e. Well known) buddy lists - e.g. "rcs" for the list of RCS-capable users. But I don't think this is what you are referring to.
> 
> BR/Brian.
> 
> > Subject: Re: [Simple] Controversial: Have SIMPLE reached is goal? Or is it an IETF failure?
> > From: [email protected]
> > Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 08:50:32 +0200
> > CC: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > To: [email protected]
> > 
> > 
> > 14 okt 2012 kl. 23:48 skrev "Brian McColgan " <[email protected]>:
> > 
> > > Good luck with that Adrian. As I said 'IETF' doesn't get it.
> > 
> > Which takes us back to my original issue - can we get IETF to fix SIMPLE?
> > 
> > /O

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple