Subject: [Sipping] Seeking Clarification on draft-ietf-sipping-service-identification-00.txt

From: Mahesh <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 15:42:00 +0530

I'm resending my query, I felt the subject of my prev mail didnt have
appropriate Subject Line.

Dear  Rosenberg and All,
I'm looking for some fundamental clarifications in this draft.

It is with regard to distinctly diffrentiating the Applications using a
Communication Service and the Communication Service itself
(and thus Communication Service Identification & Application
Identification).
(Example:
    - Chess Game is an Application used by User to interact with another
       User and the Application uses(May)  Messaging  Communication Service
    - Instant Messenger is an Applciation used by User to interact with
      another User and the Application  again uses Messaging
      Communicaiton Service.
    - Voice Call is an Application used by User to interact with another
       User and the Application uses CS Telephony or VoIP Communcation
       service.
)

Starting with, let me discuss w.r.t the following excerpt from the draft
"Service  identification is the process of determining and/or signaling the
   specific use case that is driving the signaling being generated by a
   user agent."

Here, if the signaling is really able to signal the Use-Case that is driving
the Signaling then it would be Application Identification rather than just
just
Communication Service Identification because the Use-Case(defining the
User Experience) is modelled by the Application and not the
Communication Service.
But i'm confused, because the draft title is "Identification of
Communication
Services" and also in the definition itself , it says  "Service
Identification".
Should this be "Communication Service Identification" ?.
 If so i feel a siganling/determining  a Communication Service is not
synonymous to determining/siganlling the Use Case which is driving the
signalling.

So i tried to seek answer in Sec 3 which tries to define "Service". Here,
extract from RFC 4479(Presence Data Model) is referred to define a Service.
" Each presentity has access to a number of services.  Each of these
represents a point of reachability for communications that can be   used to
interact with the user."

There are two ways of interpreting this
    i1)"Point of reachability for Communications " can be WhiteBoard,
        Chess Game,Chatt Application  which are all different instances of
        Interaction with the User.
    i2)"Point of reachability for Communications" can be Messaging
        Service, CS Telephony, PS Telephony which can be used by
        Applications such as Game,Instant Messenger,WhiteBoard etc to enable
        interaction with the User.

It is more meaningful  if it were (i1), so that the Presentity Info conveys
exactly the kind of Use-Case/Interaction that a User can engage in with
another
User.Which Communication Service would be used to achive the
Interaction/Use-Case may be irrelevant to the User.

But again later on in Sec3 of the draft i find the following:
"Essentially, the service is the user-visible use case that is driving
   the behavior of the user-agents and servers in the SIP network."

This confuses me further because if "Service" is looked as as a user-visible
use case then there is ambiguity  because
    - The Title of  the draft is "Identification of Communication Service",
    - However The term "Service" is being used to refer to the User Visible
      Usecase but definition of Service Identification says "Service
       identification is the process of determining and/or signaling the
       specific use-case".
    - User Visible Use Case cannot be synonymous to Communication Service,
       in other words a Communication service may not be able to completely
       indicate/describe the User experience. For Example: by inidcating
       a Messaging Communication Service i cannot know if User is wants
       Gaming or Chatting.

I may be missing something in basic principle of "Service". Can somebody
help me get clarity here.

regards
Mahesh Anjanappa

_______________________________________________
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: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 15:29:26 +0900

The silence may be because the distinction between a feature, service, and
application is entirely arbitrary.  There has been a long discussion of this
on the BLISS list, which is pretty remarkable for a 4-month-old work group.

> help me get clarity here.

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.