[Operators] Protocol agnostic URI for voice or video call?

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Jan 28 18:31:13 UTC 2013


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 1/26/13 4:30 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> 
> 
> On 26/01/13 22:03, Mikko Lehto wrote:
>> 2013-01-07 (Mon) 15:16 UTC +0100  Daniel Pocock 
>> <daniel at pocock.com.au>:
>> 
>>> However, im: implies text chat only.  Are there equivalent 
>>> prefixes to suggest voice and/or video sessions, and is there
>>> any generic prefix to suggest any arbitrary possibility
>>> (including smtp) at the caller's discretion?
>> 
>> Hi Daniel
>> 
>> Are you aware of acct: URI scheme¹ ? Maybe that can be utilized.
>> 
>> [1] draft-ietf-appsawg-acct-uri
> 
> 
> Thanks for bringing that to my attention, I think it almost 
> addresses what I had in mind

Please do send feedback about the acct-uri spec to the
apps-discuss at ietf.org list. The Working Group Last Call started today.

> s4.7 interoperability doesn't mention the fact that xmpp: and sip: 
> have slightly different sets of permitted characters for the user@ 
> portion of a URI.

Yes, that's a fun problem. See section 4 of this Internet-Draft:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-core/

> s4.3 could probably be extended to define a subset that is
> compatible with mailto:, xmpp: and sip: all at once

It's not the intent of the 'acct' URI to be such a subset. However, if
you think that's a desirable feature then please provide input during
the aforementioned last call.

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlEGw/EACgkQNL8k5A2w/vw2KACfayxEttmh+SxR9cr+DWVDMZ49
ePoAoPFM6sbObjVHZCDKDylVcE9U5oHa
=Q5oG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the Operators mailing list