Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Roach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 27. syyskuuta 2007 16:17 > To: Brian Stucker > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO > > Brian Stucker wrote: > >> Eric's document basically takes the second approach, > grandfathering > >> all uses of INFO that are currently published in an RFC or > an active > >> internet-draft, and forbidding any others. The list is not > long; I'll > >> replicate it here: > >> > >> 1. RFC 3372 > >> > >> You want more than that, you really need packages. > >> > > > > Expand that list to include application/dtmf and I think you'll > > largely end the debate. > > > > It wouldn't be fair to ask you to show me the IANA > registration for that MIME type, so I won't -- but the > practical problem here is that no one has even *tried* > formalizing this mechanism. > > To be clear, I would argue against standardizing such an > approach (but that discussion is tangential to this one, and > would only distract). My point is: even if someone wants to > support your position, there's nothing for them to support; > there's not even an individual draft -- not even an *expired* > one -- documenting the INFO usage you're promoting.
I actually DO think there was a DTMF-using-INFO draft at some point - a long time ago. Now, that draft probably did not address all the issues we have discussed, so I am pretty sure it wouldn't be very useful at this point. In any case, I still wonder whether writing a DTMF-using-INFO draft is a good starting point. I still think we should look at the whole thing from a more generic perspective first: what are the issues we would need to work on in order to make the usage of INFO better. Regards, Christer _______________________________________________ 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
