Subject: RE: [IPTEL] How many protocols do I need to implement

From: "Roy, Radhika R, ALCTA" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 22:20:12 -0400

Cullen:

My comments are provided below [RRR].

Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:39 PM

The LS is going to need TRIP to do the ITRIP and ETRIP type stuff. I am
hopeful that I can just tweak this code a bit and not add yet another
protocol to get information from the GW. 

[RRR] Intra-ITAD communications have different requirements (e.g.,
resolution of destination addresses only - not route propagation etc.)
E.164, email IDs, URL IDs; Telephony GWs, SIP-H.323 GWs). So, TRIP is not
directly applicable. All we need to do that LSs get all necessary
information including TRIP that has been optimized for the telephony routing
for inter-ITAD communications. We can make it like-TRIP using the same
message formats, but it will be a simple one (not the heavy-weight
inter-ITAD TRIP) whether we name it ITRIP or ETRIP is a different matter.

If we add a completely different
protocol, with a different way of representing attributes, I feel that it
will significantly up the issues of 1) defining correct mapping between this
protocol and I/E TRIP. 2) up development and particularly test. Similarly,
the GW will may need to act like a LS and do ITRIP for cases where there is
no LS in the network.

[RRR] I would not say that we need a completely different protocol. For
example, the draft (draft-roy-iptel-itrp-00.txt) is almost like TRIP (later
on, I have proposed that we can use the exact message format of TRIP with
some modifications). So, we do not need a new protocol per se.

If SLP is clearly better and provides some other things - great but if it
just an alternative to TRIP, well I am worried I will now have to do both
instead of just one.

[RRR] SLP is a new protocol and multicasting is the basis where many
services are discovered/advertised (not just GW services). It is a very
heavy-weight discovery protocol where many services are advertised or
discovered.

Cullen

_______________________________________________
IPTEL mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/iptel

_______________________________________________
IPTEL mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/iptel

---

From: "Cullen Jennings" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 20:40:34 -0700

Few comments inline [CJ]

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy, Radhika R, ALCTA [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 7:20 PM
To: Cullen Jennings; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [IPTEL] How many protocols do I need to implement

Cullen:

Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:39 PM

[CJ] I'm not quite understanding what you are getting at here. Intra ITAD
routing may need to export routes - I can imagine ATT wanting to send you to
a different proxies depending on if the E.164 number you were calling was in
the US or the UK.

[CJ] Agree

Cullen