At the last call of this document I raised the following issues:
SRL> Section 4.3.2 states:
SRL>
SRL> The Answer-Mode and Priv-Answer-Mode header fields have
equivalent
SRL> functions, except that Priv-Answer-Mode requests a higher level
of
SRL> privilege in granting the answering mode specified by the
request.
SRL>
SRL> Would it not make sense to have a single header that performs both
SRL> of these equivalent functions, using a parameter (e.g. 'high' or
'level=high') to distinguish between the two?
SRL>
SRL> This might have the following benefits:
SRL>
SRL> 1) The document would be smaller.
SRL> 2) The implementation may be simpler.
SRL> 3) If the need for more than just two levels of privilege were
found in the future then this could be easily extended, rather than
following the current pattern of needing another header, e.g.
Really-High-Priv-Answer-Mode:
My questions were answered by Dean, but I now notice the following in
the current draft:
"4.1. Procedures at User Agent Clients (UAC)
4.1.1. All Requests
A UA supporting the Answer-Mode and Priv-Answer-Mode header
fields
SHOULD indicate its support by including an option tag of
"answermode" in the Supported header field of all requests it
sends."
Other sections also mention this single option tag.
Would it not make more sense to use two separate option tags, e.g.
"answer-mode" and "priv-answer-mode"? That would seem to be more
orthogonal to me if this scheme were to be open to extension in the
future?
_______________________________________________
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
