[SIPForum-discussion] [SIPForum-techwg] Request for Comments -Preliminary Feature Set Document

[Romascanu, Dan (Dan)]

Hi,
 
I agree with Peter's points related to the granularity of the features
list - RFC level is certainly too course. 
 
Wrt. other supporting features we probably want to discuss - there is
useful stuff here, but not all necessarily falls under 'SIP Phones
Interoperability' which is the focus of the document. 
 
Missing also are any manageability and reporting capabilities. We may
want to discuss if they fall within the scope. 
 
Dan
 
 
 
 


  _____  

	From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org
[mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of
peter_blatherwick at mitel.com
	Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 4:51 PM
	To: larry schessel
	Cc: Dutkiewicz, Marek; techwg at sipforum.org;
discussion at sipforum.org; techwg-bounces at sipforum.org
	Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] [SIPForum-techwg] Request for
Comments -Preliminary Feature Set Document
	
	

	Hi all, 
	
	Sorry for the delay.  I do have some basic comments, for
discussion on the call today.   
	
	The general categorization looks basically fine overall, though
I'm sure we could (and will) dicker over details.   
	
	My main comment is the content is (so far) basically just a list
of RFCs, with no support for why that particular list needs to be
supported.  The sections are called "features" (in Markus' listing), but
do not really list what the features are, just the RFCs.  For example,
if REFER is required, why, what user operations does it support?  I
think, for each section, we need to outline specifically what features
are expected to be supported, may even need to roughly define the
features (*gasp*).   Then, what RFCs (perhaps even specific sections)
are needed to do so.  If there are multiple ways pointed by the RFCs,
then pick *one*. as the recommended.   
	
	Another concern is there are other supporting pieces needed to
provide a quality product.  For example: 
	- basic IP networking (eg. Diffserv, including recommended
DSCPs) 
	- IEEE stuff, eg 802.1D/p, 802.1Q, LLDP/LLDP-MED ... 
	- Acoustic performance, loss plans and such (can point to TIA
specs for these) 
	I Can gather some refs for these bits if we agree it is needed.

	
	A small organization thing:  I suggest "Core" be subdivided,
roughly as follows: 
	   6.1 Core functions (basis for all other feature sets 
	      6.1.1 Core SIP (current sec 6.1) 
	      6.1.2 Core Networking (some of the stuff listed above) 
	      6.1.3 Core security (current sec 6.2) 
	      6.1.4 Core NAT traversal current sec 6.12 ... assuming we
would want to say all MUST do NATs) 
	
	We will also need a section on emergency services support. 
	
	Hope this helps, and talk to y'all in a few... 
	
	Peter Blatherwick 
	
	 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20070515/7ba5ed8c/attachment-0002.html>