Re: New version of "draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info" draft submitted

"Avasarala Ranjit-A20990" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sip
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Gilad
 
Thanks for reviewing the document. Here my comments with <Ranjit>
Regards 
Ranjit 
 

________________________________

From: Gilad Shaham [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:50 AM
To: Avasarala Ranjit-A20990; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Sip] New version
of"draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info" draft submitted



Hi,

 

See some comments

 

Page 5:

   "... For e.g. the subscriber wanted to diverted all incoming calls to
voice-mail,
   between 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.  Yet, by mistake she configures the
   time-duration as 3.00 to 4.00 p.m"

Some of the sentence needs restructuring and I also don't fully
understand the example. Is it AM-PM or wrong field was configured? 

<Ranjit> Agreed.  Will correct the sentence. 

 

Page 12:

What if time-range is missing? What should be the default? Sounds to me
the default should be the current time with no end date. 

<Ranjit> if time-range is missing, then notifications for all
communication diversions are sent. 

 

Page 14:

In Comm-div-info-selection-criteria there are several disable-*
subsections, yet their text describes these element gives the subscriber
option of adding information. Shouldn't this be for omitting information
or alternatively, call these elements "enable-*" or did I misunderstand
the purpose. 

<Ranjit>  E.g disable-originating-user-info -> this element gives the
subscriber the option of adding originating-user-info element to the
notification information. The default value is false which means that
the subscriber wants the originating-user-info element to be present as
part of the notification information. If the value is set to TRUE, then
originating-user-info element is removed from the notification
information document. 

 

Page 16:

             <user-name>Boss</originating-user-name>

Should be

             <user-name>Boss</user-name> 
<Ranjit> Corrected.
 

It might be also useful to see an example of periodic request. 

<Ranjit> Will see if I can add one. 

 

Page 21:

503 is there, but I don't see 500. Some implementations will avoid 503
and use 500 due to discussion related to this
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hilt-sip-correction-503-01 (now
expired, but still affected some vendor decisions). I might be able to
think of some scenario that involves 502, but I assume this is a result
of the diversion implementation itself so maybe that's the context of
this discussion. 

<Ranjit> Will add 500 also. 

 

Thanks

 

Thanks

Gilad

 

________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:07 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [Sip] New version
of"draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info" draft submitted

 

Hi All 

We have submitted an updated version of
draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info 

It can be accessed at:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-no
tification-01.txt
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-n
otification-01.txt> 

This draft proposes a SIP Event package for Communication Diversions
Notification Information and conforms to procedures and schema described
in 3GPP TS 24.604. 

Please review and comment

Regards 
Ranjit

_______________________________________________
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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.