Skip to main content

Minutes for INSIPID at interim-2012-insipid-4
minutes-interim-2012-insipid-4-1

Meeting Minutes INtermediary-safe SIP session ID (insipid) WG
Date and time 2012-06-25 07:00
Title Minutes for INSIPID at interim-2012-insipid-4
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2012-07-10

minutes-interim-2012-insipid-4-1
Minutes for INSIPID virtual interim #2 Meeting
==============================================

25th June 2012: 9:00 - 11:00 Pacific US time
--------------------------------------------

Chairs:
Keith Drage <drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com>

Present:
Keith Drage
Gonzalo Salgueiro
Paul Jones
Dan Romascalo
James Polk
Laura Leiss
Paul Kyzivat
Salvatore Loreto

Agenda and note well
--------------------

Keith Drage apologized for the late start, with the unforgivable excuse that he
had forgotten all about the interim.

Note well was read.

The posted agenda was agreed.

Requirements document
---------------------

Before adopting the text as a WG document, Keith (as chair) sought
clarification of what was being adopted. It was clarified that the scope of the
document would be to cover: -       use cases -       requirements -       how
requirements are derived from the use cases While some of this material is
missing from the document this would be the target, and the call for adoption
would be on this basis.

It was identified that improved text was needed for requirement 1A, and
therefore someone needed to send text.

It was agreed that requirements 5 and 6 should be merged.

It was identified that for this we really need the underlying use case, which
seemed to be that we should not be able to identify that the call went through
an SBC.

It was questioned whether we need to hide the fact that the id is changing, or
only to hide the information.

For requirement 7, Laura agreed to draft and propose a use case.

For requirement 9, it was agreed to split this into 3, as it was likely the
three interworking possibilities would be covered by three entirely different
use cases. Whether we keep all three is of course open to discussion.

The chairs made a call for volunteers to submit use case text. James
volunteered for at least some of this work.

Solutions document
------------------

The slides on the solutions document from the Paris meeting were presented.

There was a discussion the impact of using XCON (in addition to SIP) on the
solution. If XCON is impacted we may need a new requirement. An action was
taken (not sure by who) to investigate this further.

Paul identified for the MCU slide these could be To and From tags only. Can we
default to only those if that is all we need?

A walk through the document identified to remove section 4 entirely, and to
expand section 3 to cover the requirements and use cases by reference.

There was a discussion of the ordering of the two halves of the identifier
between the request and the response.

Next steps
----------

Call for adoption of WG draft will start as soon as new version issued with
changes identified in this meeting.