Subject: comments on draft-ietf-sip-isup-mime-00.txt

From: "Schroeder, Tim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 17:27:46 -0600

Section 3.1 says:

Note: It is mandatory for SoftSwitches to specify the 'version' 
of  the ISUP message. Proxies, redirect servers, etc., have no 
need to  process/specify this information.

The use of the 'version' parameter allows differentiation 
between  different base ISUP variants. This enables the 
SoftSwitch (also known as a Media Gateway Controller) to 
recognize and parse the message correctly,  or (possibly) to 
reject the message if the  particular ISUP variant is not 
supported.

I'm wondering if it's necessary to bring in these terms (SoftSwitch, media
gateway controller) from an assumed architecture.  The draft stands on its
own just as well without them, if I understand it correctly.

The first paragraph quoted above is saying that the user agents (clients and
servers both) must specify the version, but that the proxy and redirect
servers do not need to specify or process it.  The second paragraph says the
user agents (again, both clients and servers) will use the version to
recognize and parse the message, etc.

I'd like to see this changed, so that the draft is more generally applicable
to any architecture that needs to package ISUP/QSIP within a SIP message,
rather than tying it to a particular SoftSwitch/MGC architecture.

Tim Schroeder