Subject: RE: [Sipping] SIP-AAA Requirements (fwd)

From: "Mary Barnes"<[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 13:31:24 -0500

Pete,

The minutes associated with the discussion of this draft are at:
http://www.softarmor.com/sipwg/meets/interim-may-02/notes/morning-day2-barne
s.htm

Regards,
Mary H. Barnes
[email-masked]
972-684-5432
Wireless 817-703-4806

-----Original Message-----
From: Pete McCann [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 1:26 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Sipping] SIP-AAA Requirements (fwd)

Hi,

I have read over draft-loughney-sip-aaa-req-00.txt and I have some
comments below; unfortunately, I was not able to attend the interim
meeting.  Would anyone be willing to summarize the discussion that
took place on this draft?

I am glad to see that the first requirement mentions
access-independence.  I think it is very important for the IETF to
develop one common solution for SIP-AAA that works on any kind of
access network.

I noticed that a bit of terminology leaked into the document from
somewhere else: the term "home entry SIP proxy" is used in 2.1.6, but
I don't think it's defined anywhere in the draft.  I would like to
make sure that the discussion in the draft is focused on terms like
UACs, UASs, and proxies, without assuming any particular arrangement
of network elements or relationships between proxies.

The last paragraph of the introduction says:

   SIP sessions have needs for session authentication, authorization and
   accounting (i.e. - payment). 

I want to point out that accounting and payment are not the same
thing.  I think of accounting (in the AAA sense) as reporting usage,
and it could even be called "charging," but billing/payment/settlement
are separate issues.  Are they in the scope of SIP-AAA?  I am not
sure.

I notice section 2.3 only has one requirement - authorization of SIP
registration.  I would actually include subscriber-profile requirements
(e.g., 2.1.2 Distribution of Profiles) in this section.

Section 2.4.10 uses the terms "online" and "offline".  I think there
should be a definition of these terms and requirements added to
support both models.  "Online" accounting/charging usually means
downloading some kind of credit into the access device, and deducting
from that credit as usage accumulates.  The ID
draft-hakala-diameter-credit-control-02.txt is an example.  "Offline"
charging is simply transferring records to a home accounting server,
for later billing and settlement, without doing any accounting-related 
control or feedback for the services rendered.

I look forward to seeing Section 3 (Scenarios) fleshed out.

-Pete

_______________________________________________
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: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 12:27:12 +0300

Hi Pete,

I've trimmed the reply-to list.

> develop one common solution for SIP-AAA that works on any kind of

This is one of the goal.
 
> of network elements or relationships between proxies.

This I will fix, please feel free to provide text, however.

> are separate issues.  Are they in the scope of SIP-AAA?  I am not

Agreed, I will fix it.
 
> registration.  I would actually include subscriber-profile 
> requirements (e.g., 2.1.2 Distribution of Profiles) in this section.

I can do this.

> for later billing and settlement, without doing any 
> accounting-related  control or feedback for the services rendered.

I will do this as well.

John