Hi Milo,

>IMHO outbound should specifies "alternative paths". Here is what I mean
>by "alternative paths".
> 
>Assume that China Airline has two counters (contacts), one only English
>speaking the other only Chinese spiking. It doesn't matter if you took
>either the escalator or the elevator to the English speaking counter
>(the elevator and escalator are alternatives paths).  However, if the
>elevator gets you to English speaking counter and the escalator gets you
>to Chinese speaking counter - they are not alternatives. 
>Hence, you have two choices, i.e. either
>1. the two alternatives get you to the same counter, or 
>2. make the second counter also English speaking.
>My choices is 1. (e.g. I don't want to be constrained that the
>alternative contact addresses must be registered with the same feature
>tags). 

So, I assume you AGREE with me: it shall be possible to register different 
capabilities on different flows?

...eventhough you objected when I brought it up in 3GPP ;)

Regards,

Christer



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Christer Holmberg
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 12:56 AM
To: Dean Willis; SIP IETF
Subject: Re: [Sip] Stupid question on flow use in outbound


Hi, 

>Assume Bob's UA is using outbound and is registered with two flows.  
>Both flows use the same instance-id. The first flow goes through edge-
proxy 1 and has reg-id 1. The second flow goes through proxy 2 and has
reg-id 2.
>
>Both flows are "live" from a keepalive perspective.
>
>Alice calls Bob.
>
>Which flow gets exercised?
>
>Where in Outbound is this described? If it is not in Outbound, is it
described somewhere else? If it is simply left-to-the-implementation,
does this need to be explained somewhere?

I guess it is (for good or bad) left-to-the-implementation.

HOWEVER, one thing which has been discussed, and which I think we SHOULD
say something about, is whether it's allowed to use a different set of
user capabilities for each flow.

Personally I think it would be useful. For example, I could indicate
that I want to receive incoming video calls over my super-fast-broadband
access, instead of my slow jungle-drum access.

I don't think we would need very much text for this either. Maybe a note
saying something like:

"NOTE: A user MAY register different set of user capabilities (using the
mechanism in [ref-to-RFC3840] on each flow, if the user wishes the
registrar to choose a particular flow based on caller preferences
[ref-to-RFC3841]."

...or something like that.

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to