2010/9/17 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[email protected]>: >> 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. >> > > Any URI which doesn't match any identity condition. If a URI matches > several rules and there is an identity or external list condition in > any of them, that one should be applied, instead of the other-identity > rule.
In OMA-pres-rules, the order of "<rule>" elements is important as rules are checked from top to botton until one rule matches (its <conditions> node). However, AFAIR this is not true in unconcise/incomplete/abstract/unuseful RFC4745. >> 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? >> > > Maybe, but I couldn't find any reference to this :-) unconcise/incomplete/abstract/unuseful. Try XMPP. That really works as it is designed to work. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
