Subject: RE: [Sipping] autolearning of AORs

From: "Michael Procter" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:24:16 -0000

Juha Heinanen wrote:
> 
> Michael Procter writes:
> 
>  > In that example, that is true.  However, I think that if you are
>  > deploying a phone into a network that you have some control over,
>  > then you can arrange for a domain name to be supplied by the DHCP
>  > server, which can then be used in an SRV lookup to find a proxy,
>  > to which you can send the inital SUBSCRIBE.
> 
> i don't get it.  i'm now in a hotel room and i don't have any control
> whatsoever with the DHCP server where i got my ip address.

Sorry, I forgot that your username includes a host/domain portion.  In
that case, type in [email-masked]' and SUBSCRIBE to that.  You can
bypass the initial discovery phase since you already know the answer.

I am still assuming the the hotel DHCP server will give you a DNS server
address, but I'd be surprised to find one that doesn't.

Once you subscribe to get the device and user profiles etc, you can
have your phone configured as desired.  In particular, you aren't
limited to a single AOR, which I think was one of your initial concerns.

Does this make sense or have I missed the point you are making?

Michael

_______________________________________________
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: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:34:42 +0200

michael,

subscribe/notify based AOR discovery requires implementing a dialog in SIP
UA, which is much more complex thing to do than a query/response
transaction.  at the registrar, things get even worse, because registrar
would need to implement a presence server instead of simply returning a
reply.  

for these reasons i still think that config framework is an overkill for
AOR discovery.

-- juha

---

From: "Dale R. Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:53:12 -0500

> for these reasons i still think that config framework is an overkill for

It may be overkill, but even so, it has some advantages:  One is that
most of this machinery has already been defined and most UAs will have
to implement it for other reasons, so there is little increased system
complexity.  A second advantage is that auto-configuration is a much
messier problem than it looks like (which is why the config framework
looks so complex).  But once you start sorting through what *all* the
needed features are, for *all* the people who need to use it, what
initially seemed to be simple and light-weight may not be so.

In any case, if you think you've got a significantly better approach to
the problem, why don't you write up an initial specification?  That will
allow everyone to evaluate the proposal on its true merits.

Dale

---

From: "Juha Heinanen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 04:41:41 +0200 (EET)

Dale R. Worley said:

> complexity.

i haven't seen any activity on implementing the framework in sip phones.

> allow everyone to evaluate the proposal on its true merits.

i'll implementing a one shot AoR discovery either based on options method
or register method.  once done, i can document it.

-- juha