Look Up Function vs. Location Routing Function discussion
draft-schumacher-drinks-luf-lrf-diff-01
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Greg Schumacher , Hadriel Kaplan | ||
| Last updated | 2008-11-03 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This document provides a comparison between the Look Up Function (LUF) and the Location Routing Function (LRF) as used for inter and intra-domain SIP session routing. It also develops the relationship between the two functions. This document is meant for discussion purposes only. Schumacher Expires May 3, 2009 [page 1] Look Up Function vs. Location Routing Function discussion Nov 2008
Authors
Greg Schumacher
Hadriel Kaplan
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)