Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!gryphon!vector!telecom-gateway From: munnari!batserver.cs.uq.oz.au!anthony@uunet.uu.net (Anthony Lee) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Service interactions between CFU and CCBS (Busy Retry) Message-ID: Date: 11 Sep 89 02:11:59 GMT Reply-To: anthony%batserver.cs.uq.OZ@uunet.uu.net Lines: 25 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 365, message 1 of 7 I have a Special Report For Service Interactions by S. J. Chin (BNR Canada) of CCITT working party XI/5 (1987). The title of the report is "Specification technique for stage 2 supplementary service interactions". In this report there was a section under the subheading Types of functional interactions. The author indicated in this section that some services are functionally incompatible. The particular example that was given involved the CFU (Call Forwarding Unconditional) and CCBS (Completion of Call to Busy Subscriber which is just a retry service) services. The example goes like this "... A user activating CFU, when being scanned/monitored for CCBS recall, will cause the scanning/monitoring to be withdrawn or abandoned." My question is why withdraw the scanning ? Why not barred the user who is being scanned from activating CFU ? There are a few more examples from this report which from first reading don't seem to make sense. If Mr S. J. Chin or friends are reading this newsgroup could they make a comment ? Are there later edition of the CCITT report floating around ? Thanks in advance Anthony Lee (Humble PhD student) (alias Doctor(Time Lord)) ACSnet: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz TEL:(+617) 3712651 Internet: anthony@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (+617) 3774139 (w) SNAIL: 243 Carmody Rd, St Lucia, Queensland 4067, Australia