On 9/5/07 5:10 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
to be more concrete in our discussions, we need to make decisions on
the following two issues:
1) Where in a SIP message is it allowed to reference a body part?
a) in header fields and body parts within the same multipart/related
as the referenced body part
b) in header fields and body parts that appear before the referenced
body part
c) in header fields and any body part
We discussed that doing c) would require to parse SIP messages twice
to look for potential references. Therefore, we decided to do a) or
b). The current draft specifies a), we doing b) might make sense as
well (it would be less restrictive).
I think a) is correct. If you have a body-part referencing another
body-part, they are (by definition) related. Specifying b) does nothing
but encourage extensions to specify illegal MIME handling (e.g., using
"multipart/mixed" when the body parts are actually related).
2) If a receiver does not understand a reference to a body part:
a) it should process (handle) it solely based on its disposition type
(as a fall-back mechanism). If the sender does not want this to
happen, it can use an option tag.
b) the body part will have a disposition type of "only-by-reference".
This way, since the receiver did not understand the reference, it
knows it should not process the body.
The current draft specifies a), but b) would be an interesting
optimization (no need to use option tags and reissue requests).
However, we would need to get the opinion of a MIME person on b).
I like the properties of b) -- it gets you the same place as a), but
without the occasional round-trip. If the MIME folks think that such a
Content-Disposition is kosher, I think it's worth specifying it.
/a
_______________________________________________
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
