On Jun 7, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:
What do you mean by 'information related to the session usage'?
Ugh - that's what the parenthetical below way trying to talk about.
Stuff like digits in INFO (which we say should be done with KPML
instead).
Stuff like capturing data out of a protocol on the other side of a
gateway an tunneling it to
either an application or to another gateway.
Stuff like data out of the media channel (collected an an IVR
perhaps) that needs to be passed
to an application server that's not on the media path.
More stuff than I think it will be worth trying to build clarity
around for this conversation.
My point was to _agree_ with what's in sip-info-harmful (you see that
Dean also called that out early in the thread)
and to note that we don't have the reasoning that's there stated
strongly enough in an easy to stumble across place
and without that, people are going to continue to find new ways to
fill the tubes with INFO requests.
(We need _more_ than just what's in your draft - we also need
guidance for people who are wanting to do new
things with INFO that points them to what we consider sane
alternatives instead.)
RjS
I'll also take this opportunity to remind people of the reasons I
think moving forward with more INFO usages is a bad idea:
http://www.jdrosen.net/papers/draft-rosenberg-sip-info-harmful-00.txt
-Jonathan R.
Robert Sparks wrote:
I've been getting a lot of offline questions asking for the
"right" way to carry information related to the
session-usage (often information that's being tunneled around
from companion or gatewayed protocols).
What we've got sitting around right now is probably not enough if
we don't want a new wave of things using INFO. We
need at least an easily findable explanation of why with a pointer
to which other tools would be better considered
for different types of applications.
RJS
On Jun 1, 2007, at 3:19 PM, DRAGE, Keith ((Keith)) wrote:
(As WG chair)
Is anyone out there interested in pursuing this?
If we did something, it would probably be an update to RFC 3427,
and I don't see an awful lot of WG resources being consumed if
we did, i.e. no impact on our existing workload.
However, if we wrote it, would anybody that matters respect it?
Does it solve any current issues?
Regards
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 9:01 PM
To: Dean Willis
Cc: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Jon Peterson; ext Cullen Jennings
Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO message belongs only to INVITE dialog
usage?
Hi, Dean,
However, RFC 2976 is considered to be somewhat
underspecified, and so
far the only place we've further specified its usage is in the
context of transporting binary data for telephony protocol
tunelling.
We have a standing consensus to NOT use it for arbitrary
data at this
time. If we were to start using it, we'd need to do something like
the event-packages model for INFO. So don't use it, and you
won't have to deal with this . .
.
This is my understanding also, which makes me wonder why
http://www.jdrosen.net/papers/draft-rosenberg-sip-info-
harmful-00.html
didn't advance - I remember the early 00s as a time of
frantic IETF movement, so maybe things have settled down
enough to confirm the consensus?
I am more comfortable if we nail down consensus when we can,
rather than pointing people to Jonathan's expired individual
draft for support.
Other than changing Jonathan's contact information from
Dynamicsoft, were there other updates required? :-)
Thanks,
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
--
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow Parsippany, NJ
07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED] FAX: (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
