> -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Roach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:53 PM > To: Hadriel Kaplan > Cc: 'Brian Stucker'; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO > > On 9/26/07 3:34 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: > > So I want to send you Info relating to a session but the details about > what > > info are in the content-type. Now I agree that content-type is really > not > > the appropriate header for such generically, specifically because it > > describes the body content, which may be ambiguous with usage of the > body. > > > > Thank you! That's the key point I'm trying to make.
Ahh, but the key point I was trying to make is for the one use case I care about, namely application/dtmf, it is not ambiguous. It is no more ambiguous than kpml. The only ambiguity right now is I can't tell if you'll accept it and want it. That's a solvable problem. :) > > One > > could argue Info is essentially a Notify, except in a subscription > > implicitly created by, and tied to the dialog from, an Invite. > > > > Now you're just *trying* to push my buttons. :) dtmf buttons? :) But, no, I wasn't trying to push your buttons. > The key point here is that NOTIFY will inherently be associated with an > event package, which provides enough information for the recipient to > know what to do with the body. INFO, lacking such information, is > ambiguous. And, as before, the hardest problem isn't interpreting what > is sent to you; it is indicating what *can* be sent to you. Sure, but we could (if we had to) define the same concept for INFO as sub-not has in that regard. -hadriel _______________________________________________ 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
