Subject: [Sip] New version of "draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info" draft submitted

From: "Avasarala Ranjit-A20990" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:06:59 +0800

Hi All 

We have submitted an updated version of
draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info 

It can be accessed at:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-no
tification-01.txt
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-avasarala-dispatch-comm-div-n
otification-01.txt> 

This draft proposes a SIP Event package for Communication Diversions
Notification Information and conforms to procedures and schema described
in 3GPP TS 24.604. 

Please review and comment

Regards 
Ranjit

---

From: Gilad Shaham <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:20:10 +0100

Hi,

See some comments

Page 5:

   "... For e.g. the subscriber wanted to diverted all incoming calls to
voice-mail,
   between 3.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.  Yet, by mistake she configures the
   time-duration as 3.00 to 4.00 p.m"

Some of the sentence needs restructuring and I also don't fully
understand the example. Is it AM-PM or wrong field was configured?

Page 12:

What if time-range is missing? What should be the default? Sounds to me
the default should be the current time with no end date.

Page 14:

In Comm-div-info-selection-criteria there are several disable-*
subsections, yet their text describes these element gives the subscriber
option of adding information. Shouldn't this be for omitting information
or alternatively, call these elements "enable-*" or did I misunderstand
the purpose.

Page 16:

             <user-name>Boss</originating-user-name>

Should be

             <user-name>Boss</user-name>

It might be also useful to see an example of periodic request.

Page 21:

503 is there, but I don't see 500. Some implementations will avoid 503
and use 500 due to discussion related to this
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hilt-sip-correction-503-01 (now
expired, but still affected some vendor decisions). I might be able to
think of some scenario that involves 502, but I assume this is a result
of the diversion implementation itself so maybe that's the context of
this discussion.

Thanks

Gilad

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:07 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [Sip] New version
of"draft-avasasarala-dispatch-comm-diversion-info" draft submitted

Hi All 

It can be accessed at:

Regards 
Ranjit