Maybe "sip-info-harmful" should be the first "WCP" (Worst Current Practice) document?
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 08 June 2007 12:43 > To: Spencer Dawkins; Robert Sparks; Jonathan Rosenberg > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO message belongs only to INVITE dialog usage? > > > Hi, > > People are implementing INFO usages WITHOUT submitting > draft-newbie-sip-whatever-over-info-00. > > And, when looking at which companies are doing it, it can be > discussed whether all of them can be considered being "SIP > newbies"... But, that's another issue. > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 8. kesäkuuta 2007 14:34 > > To: Robert Sparks; Jonathan Rosenberg > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO message belongs only to INVITE dialog usage? > > > > Hi, Robert/Jonathan, > > > > > 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. > > > > Two separate issues, both important... > > > > > (We need _more_ than just what's in your draft - we also need > > > > Jonathan may remember that I asked about his draft in discussions > > about the hitchhiker's guide. The answsr was, of course, that we > > didn't have a reasonable reference to the draft, so couldn't tell > > people who were trying to learn about SIP "don't go there" > (until, of > > course, they "go there" and submit > > draft-newbie-sip-whatever-over-info-00). > > > > So at the very least, we need an RFC number that's not in the draft > > now! > > > > > guidance for people who are wanting to do new things with > INFO that > > > points them to what we consider sane alternatives > > > instead.) > > > > It would be OK with me if we ALSO had this type of guidance ("don't > > look HERE, look over THERE") available ("stated strongly > enough in an > > easy to stumble across place"), but if coming up with that guidance > > takes more than about a week, I don't see a lot of reason > to hold up > > on "don't go there" > > while we explore alternatives. > > > > <rant>If we don't progress stuff like this, we can't be > surprised when > > the experts spend all their time explaining the same stuff over and > > over again, onlist. New participants don't want to repeat old bad > > ideas. They have plenty of opportunities to come up with NEW bad > > ideas. This is a SIP community responsibility, not just > Jonathan's and > > not just the chairs' > > responsibility. Jonathan did his part (in 2003), and Dean points to > > this draft about once a month. We need to find a way to move past > > lather-rinse-repeat about long-time semi-documented consensus. > > > > IMO. Of course. > > > > </rant> > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
