Hi Arun, >>  +        string  PrivateImsIdentity [readonly, optional] >>  + >>  +            Identity used for IMS registration. >>  +            Available if present on the ISIM. >>  + >>  +        string  PublicImsIdentity [readonly, optional] >>  + >>  +            Identity used for IMS registration. >>  +            Available if present on the ISIM. >>  + >>  +        string  HomeDomainName[readonly, optional] >>  + >>  +            Identity used for IMS registration. >>  +            Available if present on the ISIM. >>  + > > Will these not be known to the user? > When does this interface becomes alive (org.ofono.ims)? post_sim or > post_online? These are read from the ISIM, so I believe this should be available post_sim. >>  +        string  ImsToCsHandoverStatus [readonly, optional] >>  + >>  +            Indicate the handover progress status during a CS >>  +            fallback procedure. This property will only be present >>  +            when in LTE coverage. The possible values are: >>  +            "none", "started","complete", "failure". >>  +            Related AT URC: +CIREP >>  + > > Again which specification details these AT commands?. Do we need a property > like this to show the CSFB? ImsToCsHandoverStatus is the progress notification of the actual handover from LTE to CS, I believe this information will be needed for setting up the CMT device (CS Audio) and knowing when to switch from IMS Audio to CS Audio streams. > why can't we... > > while in LTE: >    oFono has network registration, connection manager, SIM and LTE >    specific interfaces > > while in CSFB : >    oFono has all other interfaces too. Yes, agree. CSFB will look similar to the case where you loose your LTE coverage and move to WCDMA/GSM. You will have the same oFono APIs available in both cases, regardless of how the change was initiated. >>  +        array{dict,array{dict}} QosFilters [readonly, optional] >>  + >>  +            Information about the QoSes and associated Packet >>  +            Filters for the Default PDN and it's dedicated bearers. >>  +            It is organized as a list of QoS definitions with >>  +            a list of corresponding packet filters. >>  + >>  +                uint8 QoSClassIdentifier [readonly] >>  +                    The numeric parameter that specifying >>  +                    the class of QoS. (3GPP TS 23.203 [85]) >>  +                    0    QCI is selected by network >>  +                    [1 – 4] guaranteed bit rate >>  +                    [5 – 9] non-guaranteed bit rate >>  + >>  +                uint16 UplinkRate [readonly, optional] >>  +                    Guaranteed Uplink Bit-rate in kb/sec. >>  + >>  +                uint16 DownlinkRate [readonly, optional] >>  +                    Guaranteed Downlink Bit-rate in kb/sec. >>  + >>  +            For each QoS defined there may be a list of Packet >>  +            Filters. Each Packet Filter is a dictionary defining >>  +            the filter. An empty Packet Filter represents the >>  +            "default" filter (Default PDN connection). >>  + >>  +                string Direction [readonly] >>  +                    "uplink", "downlink", "bidirectional" >>  + >>  +                uint8 ProtocolNumber [readonly] >>  +                    IP protocol number (0-256) >>  + >>  +                string PeerAddress [readonly] >>  +                    The remote peer's IP address. >>  + >>  +                uint16 PeerPortMin [readonly] >>  +                    Remote peer's port number min. value >>  + >>  +                uint16 PeerPortMax [readonly] >>  +                    Remote peer's port number max. value >>  + >>  +                uint16 LocalePortMin [readonly] >>  +                    The local port number min. value >>  + >>  +                uint16 LocalPortMax [readonly] >>  +                    The local port number max. value >> > > Do we really need this?. What is the real usage of this information?. > In 27.007 there are few AT commands for TFT, and are not used, may be > because no body (operator) supports this. > > In LTE will this be going to be different? In LTE the network will be responsible for setting up Dedicated Bearers (Secondary PDPs). And I believe the IMS application needs information about the TFT/QoSes when setting up a call. BTW, did you see the response from Kai earlier in this mail thread? [kai.vehmanen(a)nokia.com wrote:] >this is used e.g. for SDP preconditions mechanism used in IMS: >http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3312.html >The QoS is signalled on a per port/media basis, so relaying >the packet-filters seems like a sane approach to me (cannot really >say the same about 3312, but that's a different thing ;P). Regards, Sjur