Subject: [MEDIACTRL] Weird stuff in RFC 5552

From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 22:12:35 -0500

Looking at an erratum to RFC 5552 ("SIP Interface to VoiceXML Media
Services"), I ran into the following oddities in the definition of the
following two componets of the elements of the
session.connection.redirect array:

      *  uri - Set to the hi-targeted-to-uri value of the History-Info
         entry

This is badly phrased:  Strictly speaking, the hi-targeted-to-uri
contains "header parameters", including "Reason" and "Privacy", which
are not derived from the request-URI of the corresponding INVITE, and
are not meaningful considered as part of that URI.  So this definition
should be "Set to the hi-targeted-to-uri value, without 'headers', of
the History-Info entry"

      *  si - Set to the value of the "si" parameter if it exists,
         undefined otherwise

I can find no reference to the "si" value in VXML 2.0, RFC 4244, or in
draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-02 -- is this entry a mistake?
Ironically, taken verbatim, this definition requires the "si" value to
always be undefined, which is the same effect as if its definition
were deleted from the RFC.

What do people think of this?  Should these be fixed by an erratum?
What was really meant?

Dale

---

From: "Henry Lum" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 07:57:05 -0800

VXML2 does define a si (screening indicator) property in each element in
the session.connection.redirect. But you are correct that RFC4244 makes
no reference to screening indicator at all for Histroy-Info header so
our implementation ends up always setting it to undefined.

Regards,
Henry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On
> Behalf Of Worley, Dale R (Dale)
> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 10:13 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [MEDIACTRL] Weird stuff in RFC 5552
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MEDIACTRL mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl
> Supplemental Web Site:
> http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/mediactrl

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any files attached may contain confidential and proprietary information of Alcatel-Lucent and/or its affiliated entities. Access by the intended recipient only is authorized. Any liability arising from any party acting, or refraining from acting, on any information contained in this e-mail is hereby excluded. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, destroy the original transmission and its attachments and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Copyright in this e-mail and any attachments belongs to Alcatel-Lucent and/or its affiliated entities.

---

From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:16:48 -0500

> From: Henry Lum

Assuming that the "screening indicator" is intended to prevent the
recipient from knowing the origin, the "si" properties should be
driven by the "Privacy" headers encoded into the History-Info.

Dale

---

From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:09:01 +0100

Screening indicators, as defined in the ISDN, are nothing whatsoever to do with privacy.

Keith

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Worley, Dale R (Dale)
Sent: 25 January 2011 21:17
To: LUM, Henry (Henry); [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] Weird stuff in RFC 5552

Dale