Subject: [XCON] Re: [Simple] Chatroom Gap Analysis

From: Salvatore Loreto <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:37:22 +0300

Hi Adam,

I have read the draft and I really like it, it is a good and useful
overview.

I have just a couple of questions:

1)in section 2.1.9 "Sending Files and Images to a Chatroom" 
Even if it is true that MSRP inherently support sending of arbitrary
content, I thinks should more correct provide a mechanism that let the
user to decide if to accept or not a particular File. 
Something like the mechanism designed in the mmusic-file-transfer-mech

2)in section 2.4.2 "Discovery of Client Chatroom Support"
you claim the necessity of two new feature tags for MSRP and CPIM
support. 

Why do you think 'message' media type it is not enough?  
This media feature tag already indicate that a particular device
supports 'message' as a streaming media type.

Another possibility is using, as done in the mmusic-file-transfer-mech,
the mechanism provided in SDP Offer/Answer Model (RFC3264) for
indicating a capability to another endpoint (Section 9 of RFC 3264).
RFC 3264 indicates how to build the SDP that is included in the response
to a capability query like OPTION. It state that and endpoint builds an
SDP body that contains an "m=" line that contains the media type
(message, for MSRP).  An endpoint that supports the simple-chat SHOULD
also add a 'chatroom' media attribute for the "m=message" line.

what do you think ?

/Sal

On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 18:46 -0500, Adam Roach wrote:
> As we discussed in Chicago, I have produced a gap analysis document that 
> discusses the features available in currently deployed chatroom systems 
> and which of these can be achieved using protocols defined by or 
> currently under definition within the IETF.
> 
> Until it appears in the archives, you can grab a copy from:
> 
> http://www.nostrum.com/~adam/ids/draft-roach-xcon-chatroom-analysis-00.txt
> or
> http://www.nostrum.com/~adam/ids/draft-roach-xcon-chatroom-analysis-00.html
> 
> (The document isn't as polished as I'd like, but I think it gets all the 
> important information across).
> 
> /a
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Simple mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon