Subject: RE: [Sipping] Protocol for session policy

From: "Roy, Radhika" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 11:56:37 -0500

Hi, all:

I also support Medhavi because PacketCable (and hence 3GPP) has done
enormous amounts of works using COPS. Let us do an analysis on this as
Medhavi has suggested.

More importantly, COPS is being used for policies to foster intra- and
inter-layer communications.

Best regards,

Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Medhavi Bhatia
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:39 AM
To: 'sipping'
Subject: [Sipping] Protocol for session policy

I see a lot of similarities in the session policy model with COPS, which
is used in the 3GPP and Packet-Cable world. In my view, we need to have
some analysis to indicate why COPS is not a good fit before inventing a
new one.

-Medhavi.

_______________________________________________
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: Volker Hilt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:10:11 -0600

> inter-layer communications.
As discussed in a previous mail, a UA is not enforcing policies and does 
not act as a policy enforcement point (in fact, it is the entity on 
which policies are enforced upon!). Therefore I think the semantics of 
COPS don't provide a good match here and there might be better 
alternatives.

Volker

> *From:* [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] *On 
> Behalf Of *Medhavi Bhatia
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:39 AM
> *To:* 'sipping'
> *Subject:* [Sipping] Protocol for session policy
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 

-- 
Volker Hilt                      Bell Labs / Lucent Technologies
phone: +1 732 332 6432           101 Crawfords Corner Rd
email: [email-masked]     Holmdel, NJ 07733