Subject: Re: [Sipping] SUMMARY: Trunk groups in R-URI

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 12:50:26 EDT

In a message dated 9/4/02 5:44:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email-masked] 
writes:

> I hope I haven't missed (or inadverdently added/transposed/mis-
> interpreted) anything during summarizing; if so, please let me know.  If
> this appears to be an accurate summary and a rough consensus on this
> issue, I can (along with Cullen Jennings and Adam Roach) take a stab on
> an I-D towards this for further discussions on the list.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - vijay
> 

The first thing that such a draft needs to do is explain "why" there needs to 
be such a way to indicate a trunk group identity. I haven't seen an 
explanation of why one entity (like Proxy A) needs to communicate this 
information to another (like Proxy B) using somethin like a URL.

Mike Pierce
Artel

---

From: "Cullen Jennings" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 09:53:28 -0700

I don't have a need to communicate it from a proxy in one administrative
domain to another but I can see a need to pass it between proxies in the
same administrative domain.

Cullen

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:50 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Sipping] SUMMARY: Trunk groups in R-URI

Thanks,

- vijay

The first thing that such a draft needs to do is explain "why" there needs
to be such a way to indicate a trunk group identity. I haven't seen an
explanation of why one entity (like Proxy A) needs to communicate this
information to another (like Proxy B) using somethin like a URL.

Mike Pierce
Artel

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 14:55:03 -0500

Mike Pierce wrote:
 > The first thing that such a draft needs to do is explain "why" there
 > needs to be such a way to indicate a trunk group identity. I haven't
 > seen an explanation of why one entity (like Proxy A) needs to
 > communicate this information to another (like Proxy B) using somethin
 > like a URL.

> same administrative domain.

In addition to that, an entity (like a proxy) may need to pass
information downstream to a gateway (UAS).  Also, a gateway getting a
call from the PSTN may choose to pass the originating trunk group to
its default outbound proxy.  Admittedly, the former will be more
prevelant.

Mike: with regard to your first sentence above, I am not sure if you are
asking *why* do we need trunk groups at all, or why would one entity
want to communicate this information to the other one? (I suspect you
may know the answer to both...)

Regards,

- vijay
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani  vkg@{lucent.com,research.bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Wireless Networks Group/Internet Software and Services
Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs Innovations, 2000 Lucent Lane, Rm 6G-440
Naperville, Illinois 60566     Voice: +1 630 224 0216