[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Sipping] RE: [Simple] Multimedia message adaptationInternet-Drafts
- To: <Jose.Costa-Requena@xxxxxxxxx>, <Stephane.Coulombe@xxxxxxxxx>, <jon.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <Markus.Isomaki@xxxxxxxxx>, <dean.willis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <drage@xxxxxxxxxx>, <rohan@xxxxxxxxx>, <Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: [Simple] Multimedia message adaptationInternet-Drafts
- From: "Eric Burger" <eburger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:49:15 -0500
- Cc: <sipping@xxxxxxxx>, <simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Pekka.Pessi@xxxxxxxxx>, "IETF OPES (E-mail)" <ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxx>, "IETF LEMONADE (E-mail)" <um@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openproxy/mail-archive/>
- List-id: <ietf-openproxy.imc.org>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openproxy-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
- Sender: owner-ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcKHa5CNEMtfRz3cQRuNgd/C/YnuKwADld2AACYMJkAAi+Nw0A==
- Thread-topic: [Sipping] RE: [Simple] Multimedia message adaptationInternet-Drafts
There are already TWO work groups that are considering EXACTLY these transcoding requirements.
They are OPES and LEMONADE.
I would offer that discussion of these capabilities happen in those groups. If SIP is the appropriate mechanism, then those groups will submit the appropriate drafts to SIPPING, outlining the requirements.
> -----Original Message----- From: Jose.Costa-Requena@xxxxxxxxx
[snip]
> Nevertheless, "content adaptation" I-D has a wider scope
> since it is considering any content-type and it is taking
> into account the terminal/user preferences. So I would say
> that it fits into SIPPING WG while the filtering I-D is
> mainly dealing with presence and I think it should be handled
> at SIMPLE WG.
> BR
> Jose
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Coulombe Stephane (NRC/Dallas)
> > At a high level, these drafts also argue that capability
> > negotiation should be administered by intermediaries rather
> than through an
> > end-to-end process; this approach may attract some similar
> controversy.
>
> Proposed capability negotiation can be used both ways (end-to-end or
> administered by intermediaries).
> 1) end-to-end: Someone who wants to send an Instant Message
> to another user
> can send an OPTION query to learn about its terminal
> capabilities and
> then create a message within its capabilities.
>
> I guess this is not controversial. However how
> realistic and usable is it in practice?
> When composing a message, would a user really want to
> take into consideration
> the image formats to use, message size limitation, etc?
>
> For instance, you want to send a PNG image to a friend
> and his terminal only supports
> GIF format. What are you supposed to do? Find an image
> conversion tool to convert to GIF?
> This is annoying if you are using a PC, imagine with a
> mobile phone or handheld?
>
> For usability reasons, the user wants to send a message
> without caring "too much" about
> what the other end is supporting.
>
> 2)administered by intermediaries: this is discussed in detail
> in one of the drafts.
>
> Performing adaptation in the network is controversial
> but this is the only way to support
> interoperability and good user experience.
>
> > the applicability and impact of this mechanism is larger
> than the problem of
> > instant messaging and presence. While clearly, from the
> framework, instant
> > messaging and presence cases are driving this work, it is
> applicable to the
> > general use of SIP events (messaging, I think, is something
> of a corner case).
>
> Yes, applicability and impact is larger than IM and presence.
> It applies to many other
> applications including the case of audio/video conferencing
> (for instance when there is
> no common audio or video codec between two ends).
>
> The drafts use the "corner case" of SIP IM for a few reasons:
> 1) In SIP IM, there is no concept of capability negotiation
> (unlike the case of sessions using SDP).
> A user sends a message without knowing anything about
> the recipient's terminal capabilities.
> 2) In SIP IM, it easier to argue that there will be
> interoperability problems because of the variety of content
> types that could be sent (in audio/video session codecs are
> typically more agreed on). Right now text is mostly used but
> richer content will soon be used as is the case in Multimedia
> Messaging Service (MMS). By the way, message adaptation is a
> serious issue in MMS because of fast product capability
> evolution. It's hard to keep interoperability while not
> restricting new phones to send just "low-end" content.
> 3) It is easier to explain the problem and propose a solution
> with a smaller well-defined problem.
>
> Once we agree that SIP message adaptation is required, the
> requirements and solutions should be established from global
> perspective; not just SIP IM. For that reason, SIPPING may be
> the most appropriate place to initiate this activity.
>
> Stephane
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Peterson, Jon [mailto:jon.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 6:58 AM
> To: Isomaki Markus (NRC/Helsinki); dean.willis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> drage@xxxxxxxxxx; rohan@xxxxxxxxx; Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: sipping@xxxxxxxx; simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: [Simple] Multimedia message
> adaptationInternet-Drafts
>
>
>
> It seems to me that these filtering drafts concern the
> modification of MIME
> bodies in SIP messages by intermediaries. This is not exactly an
> uncontroversial topic in SIP circles, and therefore I don't
> think it is a
> foregone conclusion that this is work that some SIP-related WG should
> charter. At a high level, these drafts also argue that capability
> negotiation should be administered by intermediaries rather
> than through an
> end-to-end process; this approach may attract some similar
> controversy.
>
> Provided that this is work the community would like to pursue, the
> applicability and impact of this mechanism is larger than the
> problem of
> instant messaging and presence. While clearly, from the
> framework, instant
> messaging and presence cases are driving this work, it is
> applicable to the
> general use of SIP events (messaging, I think, is something
> of a corner
> case). While SIMPLE could certainly spend some time refining
> the framework
> and requirements related to IM & presence, I imagine that at
> a mechanism
> stage this work would need to take place in SIPPING.
>
> Jon Peterson
> NeuStar, Inc.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Markus.Isomaki@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:Markus.Isomaki@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 3:47 AM
> > To: dean.willis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; drage@xxxxxxxxxx; rohan@xxxxxxxxx;
> > Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: sipping@xxxxxxxx; simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [Sipping] RE: [Simple] Multimedia message
> > adaptationInternet-Drafts
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Actually this thread is about two separate things:
> > - Event filtering
> > - Multimedia message adaptation
> >
> > Neither of them appears currently on any sippish WG charter
> > currently.
> >
> > Event filtering has been discussed several times and it is
> > even mentioned in (but out of scope of) SIP Events RFC. My
> > impression has been that people think that it is needed, but
> > there has been debate about scope and feasibility. I hope the
> > requirements draft will help in that discussion. My own
> > opinion is that what is concretely needed in short term is
> > some simple filtering definitions for Presence event package.
> > More wide-scoped and complex things could be worked upon as
> > the understanding accumulates.
> >
> > Multimedia message adaptation hasn't been yet discussed much.
> > I think it is in general a desirable feature, especially for
> > relatively small and dumb terminals, which are not easily
> > upgradable and may not understand all media formats.
> >
> > So I propose the WG chairs think where these items would be
> > appropriate, and if there is enough interest for them, let's
> > put them on the charters.
> >
> > Markus
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ext Dean Willis [mailto:dean.willis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: 08 November, 2002 5:11
> > > To: Drage, Keith (Keith)
> > > Cc: sipping@xxxxxxxx; simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [Sipping] RE: [Simple] Multimedia message
> > > adaptationInternet-Drafts
> > >
> > >
> > > Well, I'd like to hear opinions from the participants here . . .
> > >
> > > Clearly they aren't explicitly on the charter for either
> > > group. Do we as
> > > yet have a consensus that we need to work on these
> > problems? If so, we
> > > can consider WHERE to work on them. I suspect SIPPING is
> closer to a
> > > matching scope than is SIMPLE, but the relevant ADs may have
> > > suggestions
> > > to make there as well.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dean
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2002-11-06 at 12:51, Drage, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> > > > I am getting a bit confused as to which group should be
> > > discussing these filtering issues.
> > > >
> > > > Could we have a statement from the WG chairs of SIPPING or
> > > SIMPLE as to whether this, and the moran drafts, are part of
> > > the scope of SIPPING or SIMPLE.
> > > >
> > > > And before you say these are both author drafts, I think we
> > > do need to charter one of the WGs to do some work in this
> > > area - I am just not sure of the exact scope yet.
> > > >
> > > > Keith
> > > >
> > > > Keith Drage
> > > > Lucent Technologies
> > > > Tel: +44 1793 776249
> > > > Email: drage@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Pekka Pessi [mailto:Pekka.Pessi@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Sent: 06 November 2002 18:24
> > > > > To: sipping@xxxxxxxx; simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [Simple] Multimedia message adaptation
> Internet-Drafts
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > While these drafts concern event filtering,
> > too, the subject was
> > > > > a bit misleading because I lazily just followed
> > up Tim's e-mail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pekka
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-coulombe-message-ada
> > > > > ptation-framework-00.txt
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-coulombe-message-ada
> > > > > ptation-requirements-00.txt
> > > > >
> > > > > Pekka Pessi <Pekka.Pessi@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > > > >We have submitted two drafts regarding multimedia message
> > > > > >adaptation. A multimedia message is typically a message
> > > > > >containing images, audio or video clips and their
> presentation
> > > > > >information, e.g., smil. Also, even XML-formatted text may
> > > > > >require adaptation in some cases.
> > > > >
> > > > > >Our goal is to have a framework using SIP, HTTP and MIME that
> > > > > >allows a person sending multimedia message to adapt
> the message
> > > > > >contents suitable to all the recipients. In some cases the
> > > > > >adaptation can be done by the sending terminal, but
> we also see
> > > > > >that an adaptation service would be very useful in
> many cases.
> > > > > >Such an adaptation mechanism is used by MMS service
> provided by
> > > > > >cellular networks nowadays.
> > > > >
> > > > > >The message adaptation work concerns both SIPPING and SIMPLE,
> > > > > >the requirements I-D lists use cases and requirements for
> > > > > >multimedia messaging and message adaptation solutions and the
> > > > > >framework I-D tries to explore possible solutions.
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > simple mailing list
> > > > > simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > http://mailman.dynamicsoft.com/mailman/listinfo/simple
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Sipping mailing list
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> > > > This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> > > > Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on
> current sip
> > > > Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > simple mailing list
> > > simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://mailman.dynamicsoft.com/mailman/listinfo/simple
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > simple mailing list
> > simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://mailman.dynamicsoft.com/mailman/listinfo/simple
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
> Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
> _______________________________________________
> simple mailing list
> simple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://mailman.dynamicsoft.com/mailman/listinfo/simple
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
> Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
>