Subject: CPL Features

From: Tom Gray <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 12:14:38 -0700 (PDT)

Has anyone considered what would be the practical  maximum feature set
that could  be programmed by a set of CPL scripts? This would be a set
of features that could be programmed to interact in a deterministic
manner and whose operation would not be a source of confusion to the
user. This bears directly on the customer value of the application.

Has any thought gone into asking the calling party about his
preferences about the disposition of a call by CPL. For example the
calling party could be asked if he wishes to camp on to the called
party and wait for him to become free or to forward to voice mail.
These options could be set up as both acceptable by the terminating
party.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
 Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com

---------
This message came from the IETF IPTEL Working Group Mailing List.

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 23:23:27 -0400

> These options could be set up as both acceptable by the terminating

Yes. See:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-sip-caller-00.txt

This draft proposes defining caller preferences to be included in SIP.
The draft does not go so far as defining how the CPL might be structured
to explicitly take these into account, though.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg                       Lucent Technologies
Member of Technical Staff                   101 Crawfords Corner Rd.
High Speed Networks Research                Holmdel, NJ 07733
FAX: (732) 834-5379                         Rm. 4C-526
EMAIL: [email-masked]
URL: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~jdrosen

---------

---

From: Jonathan Lennox <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 15:04:07 -0400 (EDT)

> user. This bears directly on the customer value of the application.

Since the point of the CPL is to allow features to be assembled out of CPL
scripts, I don't think that a "maximum feature set" is really possible; the
whole point of the CPL is that it's extensible.  The feature interaction
problem is discussed somewhat in the CPL requirements I-D.  (This has
expired from the I-D archive, by now, but it's available off my web page --
<http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~lennox/>).  I'm planning on issuing an updated
version of this document soon, so any comments on it are appreciated.
 
> These options could be set up as both acceptable by the terminating

Jonathan Rosenberg mentioned his caller-preferences draft.  There are two
places where this interacts with the CPL -- potentially honoring caller
preferences in a called-party-side CPL script, and adding caller preferences
in a caller-side CPL script.  Both of these are issues I want to look at in
a future revision of the CPL.

-- 
Jonathan Lennox
[email-masked]

---------