Subject: [Simple] Clarification on XCAP

From: "Chooracken John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:09:03 +0530

Hi,
 
            After going though the XCAP draft, I have a query to be
cleared.
 
1.       How do I add multiple elements into a document? Is it supported
in the current release?
 
For e.g.:
 
Consider that, the following document is available on the server:
 
<service uri="sip:[email-masked]">
<list name="family">
<rl:entry uri="sip:[email-masked]"/>
</list>
<packages>
<package>presence</package>
</packages>
</service>
 
a.       How do I add new entries [multiple] in <list name = "family">. 
My XML payload would be something like this:
 
<rl:entry uri="sip:[email-masked]"/>
<rl:entry uri="sip:[email-masked]"/>

b.      What should be the XCAP URI?

Thanks,
John

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

---

From: Jari Urpalainen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 10:38:20 +0200

On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 12:09 +0530, ext Chooracken John wrote:
> 1.       How do I add multiple elements into a document? Is it
> supported in the current release?
> 
>  
No. There's an expired draft called multi-insert, where unions could be
used to add several elements at the same time.
> a.      How do I add new entries [multiple] in <list name =
> “family”>. 
> 
with multi-insert it would be (without escaping of course):
...~~/service/list[@name="family"]/rl:entry[@uri="sip:[email-masked]"]|/service/list[@name="family"]/rl:entry[@uri="sip:[email-masked]"]?xmlns(rl=urn:...)
with payload:
<rl:entry uri="sip:[email-masked]"/><rl:entry
uri="sip:[email-masked]"/>

an alternative with xml-patch-ops if there were a controversial http
patch-method:
xmlns="urn:..."
xmlns:rl="urn:..."
<add sel='service/list[@name="family"]'>
  <rl:entry uri="sip:[email-masked]"/>
  <rl:entry uri="sip:[email-masked]"/>
</add>

So instead in practice, you'll have to resort to multiple, perhaps
pipelined requests to do what you want.
br,
Jari

---

From: Anurag Chakravarti <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:41:43 -0500

Looks like the following path as been taken:
Single inserts in XCAP would make things simpler for now with the draft
cleaner. Extensions I guess could be revived or worked upon for other
purposes.

Regards
-Anurag

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:49:29 -0500

Correct. This was a concious decision during the design of xcap. There 
were a limited number of use cases people had for multiple insert; 
nothing that couldn't be handled by a series of single inserts.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Director, Service Provider VoIP Architecture   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[email-masked]                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

---

From: "Chooracken John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:46:27 +0530

Jonathan,

	Let us consider this particular use case:

	Suppose the user wants to add a set of members to an existing
group, say 10 members. Instead of sending a single request we will have
to do with multiple requests [10 in this case]. Some of the drawbacks
could be 

	1. The network might get clogged
	2. The user experience will be bad due to the delay in
responses.

Is it feasible to achieve addition of multiple members, if we do it in
the following fashion?

	1. We create a resource list containing the 10 members. Now with
a single HTTP PUT, we upload the document to the shared XDMS with the
document URI, say [email-masked] 

	2. Now we send a HTTP PUT to PoC XDMS, which takes care of
Groups with the reference to [email-masked] in it's payload as an
<external> reference.

Using this we can manage with only two requests/responses. 

Regards,
John / Achuth

Kodiak Networks

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Jonathan Rosenberg
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:19 AM
To: Anurag Chakravarti
Cc: Jari Urpalainen; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Simple] Clarification on XCAP

-Jonathan R.

Anurag Chakravarti wrote:

>>>"family">. 
>>...~~/service/list[@name="family"]/rl:entry[@uri="sip:[email-masked]
m"]|/service/list[@name="family"]/rl:entry[@uri="sip:[email-masked]"
]?xmlns(rl=urn:...)

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:01:05 -0600

John -

The group thoroughly went through use cases like this before making  
the design decision in question.

Please look through the archives in spring 2004 (the threads are easy  
to find). There is a copy
of the expired -multiple- draft mentioned below at
http://www.softarmor.com/wgdb/docs/draft-rosenberg-simple-xcap- 
multiple-00.txt
that you might also find helpful.

We aren't going to change that decision for the base specification.  
After reviewing the history, if you
want to work on an extension, there are several people here that will  
help discuss it.

Thanks,

RjS

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 18:42:10 -0500

Chooracken John wrote:

> to do with multiple requests [10 in this case]. 

Not likely. This use case was brought up. Xcap is usually driven by a 
human user. They don't add names in bulk; they're likely to enter one at 
a time, hitting "add" or "enter" after each one, with each one taking 
some number of seconds to enter on the UI. In such a case, it is more 
likely they would get added one at a time with xcap. The only real case 
that was made for a bulk add of users to a list was if you do the above 
operation on an airplane, and then your phone tries to sync this when 
you power on the phone when you land. This was deemed sufficiently 
corner case to not try to optimize for it.

-Jonathan R.