Subject: [Sip] WGLC for App Interact

From: Rohan Mahy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:46:22 -0800

Hi Folks,

we would like to working group last call the following draft in SIP in  
parallel with SIPPING:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-app-interaction- 
framework-03.txt

This WGLC will finish on December 3rd. Please, send you comments to the  
authors and to the *SIP* list.

thanks,
-rohan

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: Bert Culpepper <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:31:15 -0500

The last paragraph in section 4.3 discusses what I believe is an
approach where a client-remote interface is used to provide context and
a client-local interface (KPML) is used to receive input for
applications that where some prolonged dialog is needed.  The last
sentence leads me to this conclusion.  But unlike the beginning of the
section says, it implies that KPML is inappropriate for applications
that need to play a voice prompt and collect a response.  Clearly, the
approach described in this section is appropriate for a pre-paid
application, but this last paragraph seems to contradict this.  Some
text needs to be added that this paragraph is discussing using the model
for applications that require prolonged (say more than one
prompt-collect sequence) dialog with the user.

Section 9.1 has the following statement in the last paragraph.

   In the case of KPML, key events are passed to remote user
   interfaces by encoding them in RFC 2833 [17].

I can't figure out if this is a typo or statement that RFC 2833 is to be
used when a user presses a key on their keypad when application focus is
a question.  For one thing, it may be that the DTMF tones themselves
should be present in the media stream, and not just encoded using RFC
2833 for some scenarios.  (This would be negotiated using SDP.)  Or, if
this is a typo, KPML is a markup language that is not based on RFC 2833.
I recommend adding "for example" to the end of the sentence or
re-wording it to accurately describe how KPML works.

Best regards,
Bert