Subject: Re: [Simple] The need for draft-denis-simple-msrp-comedia-01.txt

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 22:17:57 +0300

Hi,
 
To my understanding there are actually three different models how people
may want to setup MSRP:
 
1. Reusing the B2BUA/SBC infra they have for voice already. For this
draft-denis-simple-msrp-comedia would be needed.
2. Reusing the ICE/TURN infra they may have sometime in the future. For
this draft-niemi-simple-msrp-ice would make sense.
3. Building a special infra based on MSRP relays. This is what we have
as RFC already.

So it seems that we will probably need to support all of these three
models. Each has their pros and cons, so there is no single answer which
one is the best. Personally I'm only aware of plans by some
ISPs/operators to deploy MSRP according to model 1. Model 2 would be
nice by the time we have ICE and TURN deployed, but that will still take
time to happen. Model 3 probably makes sense for instance for
enterprises who want to log messages and so on, but haven't heard of any
plans for it either.

So, +1 for the counter for draft-denis-simple-msrp-comedia.

Markus

________________________________

	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of ext Hisham Khartabil
	Sent: 01 April, 2008 07:54
	To: Hadriel Kaplan
	Cc: [email-masked]
	Subject: Re: [Simple] The need for
draft-denis-simple-msrp-comedia-01.txt

	(As an individual)
	 
	If RFC4976 is not the solution that people are willing to adopt,
then I would like to promote draft-niemi-simple-msrp-ice.
	 
	Thanks,
	Hisham

	On 19/03/2008, Hadriel Kaplan <[email-masked]> wrote: 

		Howdy,
		I noticed that draft-denis-simple-msrp-comedia-01.txt
was not on the agenda for simple this past week, and I wasn't sure why.
When it was presented a while back I thought there was interest for it
shown in the WG meeting, and it really is needed.  Turns out it's
because there hasn't been enough traffic on it in the mailing list.  So
this email is being sent to increase whatever counter exists for such
things.
		;)
		
		This draft should be a WG item, imho.  It's not the only
problem to fix, but it's a non-trivial change/extension that needs to be
available before too many UA's/AS's get out there.  This type of thing
really needs to be done as early as possible, methinks.
		
		-hadriel
		_______________________________________________
		Simple mailing list
		[email-masked]
		https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:24:45 -0500

The only reason that comedia is not a core part of MSRP is that when  
we were working on connection management, COMEDIA was still a work-in- 
progress and had limitations that seemed to prevent it from being a  
good fit for MSRP. It was not clear at that time that those  
limitations would be addressed. MMUSIC alledgedly did address those  
limitations, but by the time they had done so, we were well down the  
road with MSRP and chose not to go back and change that part. (MSRP  
was taking so long that if we stopped and adapted to each change in  
dependencies, we would have never completed.)

This is why RFC 4975 ended up with weasel-words around the connection  
direction that hinted that the existing approach should be considered  
a "default", and that if we later standardized a way to negotiate  
this, we could relax the normative requirement.

I agree in general that a draft on using COMEDIA for MSRP is a good  
thing. I have not sufficiently digested the draft in question to form  
an opinion on the draft itself--but it's in my queue. I suggest we  
take a stab at this, and that if we later discover that issues that  
prevent COMEDIA and MSRP from being a good fit without major changes  
to one or the other, we bail quickly. If we do not discover such  
issues, I expect (or maybe just hope)  that this would not be a huge  
effort.

Ben.

On Apr 8, 2008, at 2:17 PM, <[email-masked]> <[email-masked] 
 > wrote: