Subject: [Sipping-tispan] Requirements -02h

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:59:55 +0300

ok, so here it goes with a new iteration:

http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sipping-tispan-requirements-02h.txt
http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sipping-tispan-requirements-02h.html

And the diff version:
http://people.nokia.net/~miguel/drafts/pre/draft-jesske-sipping-tispan-requirements-02g-to-h.html

Changes:
- Clarification that we don't list every single requirement that we have.
- Calling Party Category requirements are now in the general section
- New CCBS/CCNR requirements for the callee to be able to reject a 
request for the service and to be able to use any given terminal.
- Clear of ACR text related to the override feature.

Note that I am still trying to classify my e-mail. Since you all have 
been very active in the last few days, I wouldn't be surprise to see 
that I have forgotten to add or modify something that has been agree 
upon. In such case, please drop me an e-mail and I will add it in the 
next iteration.

/Miguel
-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
sip:[email-masked]
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland

_______________________________________________
Sipping-tispan mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-tispan

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:06:15 -0400

> - Clarification that we don't list every single requirement that we have.

As I noted elsewhere, I am finding this to be a problem. The 
reinterpretation of the requirements relative to SIP rather than ISDN is 
not entirely straightforward, expecially to those of us who aren't 
familiar with ISDN.

As a result, much of the sip community here cannot properly participate 
in evaluating the proposed changes.

Also, the requirements for changes presume not only the interpretation 
of the feature, but also the contemplated implementation. I don't find a 
request for a new sip feature meaningful without being presented with 
the use case where it will be used.

	Paul