Derek,

It is already in the draft that way - I thought of this when I did the 
schema.

Thanks,
Alan

Derek MacDonald wrote:
> Section 6.1.3 describes a <joined-dialog> element which uses the id
> attribute of the dialog element to identity which dialogs are joined.
> Unfortunately, the id attribute is only unique for a UA instance. This
> requires that the state compositor MUST be prepared to offer different
> notification documents(for the same dialog) for the UAs that have
> conflicting id attributes.
>
> An alternate approach would be to not use the id portion of the dialog
> element to identity a joined dialog. It would still have call-id,
> local-tag, remote-tag and direction. This eliminates the need for a
> state compositor to provide different views; in fact, no composition
> will be required within a dialog-info element.
>
> I am not sure why we didn't do that in the first place.
> Interestingly, I couldn't find any text in rfc4235 around id attribute
> collisions.  It seems they lose meaning  when different UAs sharing an
> aor are composed in a central state agent.
>
> -Derek
> _______________________________________________
> BLISS mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
>
>
>   

_______________________________________________
BLISS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss

Reply via email to