Hi;
Don't forget that most Media Servers Control protocols
use SIP info to carry their XML payload to control the media server.
Regards
Diego B
Gilad Shaham wrote:
Many people are still under the impression that DTMF should/can be done with
INFO.
For example: http://www.vonage-forum.com/ftopic5305.html
I'm not even sure how many people are aware of RFC 4730 as it's quite new.
However, RFC 4730 does not explain why DTMF should be done by event
notification rather than INFO. This feature was missing for a long time in SIP
so many implementations already have INFO with DTMF (I won't provide links for
that, but it's easy to find via any popular search engine).
I also seem to remember a company, with a lot of experience with SIP that
offered a few years ago to do floor control with INFO. Basically anyone who
wants to do something proprietary without thinking about it too much will go
for INFO. Since RFC 3265 came out things have improved because many realize
event packages are a better solution. However, INFO is still considered a
viable candidate for many of these solutions because it seems as an option SIP
provides and perhaps even endorses. I assume it's because the INFO concept is
very simple.
Unfortunately INFO is required for SIP-T, therefore there is a valid usage.
The options I see are:
1. Provide BCP (or WCP as stated below) for INFO.
2. Deprecate the current RFC and define INFO for SIP-T only.
3. Find another solution for SIP-T and wipe out INFO from SIP.
4. Find more cases that mandate INFO (are there any?) and redefine its scope.
Gilad
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Langstaff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 3:49 PM
To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); Spencer Dawkins; Robert Sparks; Jonathan
Rosenberg
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO message belongs only to INVITE dialog usage?
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
_______________________________________________
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
