Piotr S. Kossowski wrote:
> Folks
>
> I have got two questions:
>
> 1.
> RFC3261 defines B2BUA.
> What was the resason for adding this term to the document? As far as i
> could check, this item is used only once in the RFC, in paragraph
> 20.22.
As we (the SIP community, that is) gained implementation and operational
experience post RFC2543, certain terms and ideas were further made
concrete. B2BUA is one of them; note that a proxy can be considered a
B2BUA, albeit a very restrictive one (i.e. it cannot change To, From,
remove Via's in requests being forwarded, etc.). Since the term was
being used anyway, RFC3261 simply codified it for reference.
> 2.
> This question is not directly for this group, but perhaps do you know
> what is a state of PINT issues? Their WG was closed on feb-01.
> Is PINT vivid idea OR was everything done and there was no need
> to keep PINT WG longer OR was it abandoned and died?
> Does someone take care of PINT (SPIRITS too) now? (WG, forum,
> vendors etc.)
PINT has been concluded, having met its charter goals. SPIRITS is
currently active. I don't know what the official IETF's position is on
concluded WGs, but since the concluded WGs do produce RFCs, at the very
least, these RFCs live on.
Regards,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani vkg@{lucent.com,research.bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Wireless Networks Group/Internet Software and Services
Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs Innovations, 2000 Lucent Lane, Rm 6G-440
Naperville, Illinois 60566 Voice: +1 630 224 0216
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
