Victor Pascual Ávila wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> 2008/9/29, Victor Pascual Ávila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> Please, could you quote the text from RFC3261 where it is specified >>> that only one transport protocol MUST be used within a transaction? I >>> failed to find it. >>> >>> In case there's no such a text...What if, for whatever reason, a SIP >>> entity desires to use different transport protocols for requests and >>> responses within the same transaction? >> I hope useless features like these should be punished with prision. >> Please, keep SIP simple (maybe it's too late), or at least don't make >> it more complex by allowing/adding not requested and useless features. >> ;) > > Iñaki, thanks for such a constructive response. Please, point the > specification where I can find that using different transport > protocols is not allowed within a transaction and I'll be more than > happy to agree with your unreferenced arguments.
The specification is not so far-reaching in its anticipatory deterministic ambitions as to account for all possible instances of dementia among implementors, and it is not the mission of any specification to exhaustively survey, enumerate, and/or proscribe various absurd undertakings. Just because something can be done -- by virtue of not being explicitly prohibited by the specification -- does not mean that it should be done, or is compatible with the intended spirit of the RFC guidelines, to whatever extent any discursive theme can be justifiably inferred from its methodological recommendations. Iñaki is entirely in the right here. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
