2010/9/17 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[email protected]>:
> I wouldn't match that rule if any of these two cases, but someone
> might think that "the lack of conditions (condition element children)
> means that it's true always". Any thoughts on this?
AFAIK there is a new condition introduced by OMA (OMA = IM/Presence
for Mobile Operators obsessed with PushToTalk and private IP
networks).
That new condition is called "other-identity" [*] and its meaning is
that any URI matches it.
So, if the creation of such new condition has been required it means
that an empty <conditions> node isn't equivalent to "always true", am
I wrong?
[*] xmlns:ocp="urn:oma:xml:xdm:common-policy"
<ocp:other-identity/>
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
