Subject: [siprec] Two questions on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata

From: "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:28:41 +0000

Hi All,

I have two questions for which I need inputs on what we could do:

1) The object diagrams in the Appendix A have gone out of sync now due to
changes in the model. It would take some time to re-draw.
I wonder if they are really needed now ? I don't know if any one have
paidsome attention to them ? Comments ?
I feel the UML diagram is sufficient enough and we may not need the
Appendix A.

2)What about Appendix B. Do we need that now given that we are having call
flows in a separate draft ?
My preference here to move the Appendix B to call flow ID and have both
call flows + metadata in the same document (draft-ram-siprec-callflows).
draft-ietf-siprec-metadata can just refer to call flows document for
examples

Let me know your comments on this.

Regards,
Ram

---

From: "Parthasarathi R" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:28:01 +0530

Hi all,

Object instance diagram was useful while forming Metadata XML 
format. As the metadata XML format is matured and few implementation 
already exists, I'm not seeing more advantages in having object instances. 
IMO, Object instance (Appendix A)  shall be removed until otherwise 
somebody have trouble in review the metadata model relationship with 
current metadata XML schema.

I agree with Ram that metadata example shall be removed from Appendix B
as it is subset of SIPREC callflow document. Also, SIPREC callflow 
document shall include SIP & SDP message apart from metadata XML. 

Thanks
Partha

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 1:59 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [siprec] Two questions on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata

Hi All,

Regards,
Ram

_______________________________________________
siprec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/siprec