Diversion Indication in SIP
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: RFC Editor <email@example.com> Cc: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Historic to be: draft-levy-sip-diversion-10.txt The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Diversion Indication in SIP' <draft-levy-sip-diversion-10.txt> as a Historic. The IESG would also like the IRSG or RFC-Editor to review the comments in the datatracker (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=6002&rfc_flag=0) related to this document and determine whether or not they merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot and the comment log. The IESG contact person is Robert Sparks. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-levy-sip-diversion-10.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary
Technical Summary This document is a rejected alternative proposal to work completed in the SIP working group. From the abstract: This document proposes an extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). This extension provides the ability for the called SIP user agent to identify from whom the call was diverted and why the call was diverted. The extension defines a general header, Diversion, which conveys the diversion information from other SIP user agents and proxies to the called user agent. This extension allows enhanced support for various features, including Unified Messaging, Third-Party Voicemail, and Automatic Call Distribution (ACD). SIP user agents and SIP proxies which receive diversion information may use this as supplemental information for feature invocation decisions. Working Group Summary This is an RFC-editor independent submission. Document Quality This is an RFC-editor independent submission. Personnel Robert Sparks was the responsible AD for the RFC 3932 recommendations. RFC Editor Note The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in the SIP and SIPCORE working groups, but this relationship does not prevent publishing. IESG Note This document contains an early proposal to the IETF SIP Working Group that was not chosen for standardization. Discussions on the topic resulted in the informational RFC3325 "Private Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Asserted Identity within Trusted Networks", and the standard solution that was chosen can be found in RFC 4244 "An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Request History Information".