>There is a missing point in here. > >When you say "new uses of INFO are not being accepted by the >IETF for the following reasons", the problem is that people >are overstating their case when discussing the "reasons". >This in turn is annoying people who find the "reasons" not >technically accurate. > >I'd rather we try to avoid "inventing" reasons and getting >into silly long arguments. > >We could say something very simple in that draft. Something >like, INFO was created as a general transport mechanism in >SIP. As SIP evolved, new mechanisms for different usages were >created (then we can list them, and give KPML as an example >for keypress). And then just say that new usages beyond the >existing ones, i.e., ISUP/QSIG tunnelling, are therefore deprecated. > >And leave it to that. > >Any attempt at inventing complex reasons will just encourage >people to find flaws in the arguments.
Ignorning the reason why people are using INFO is not going to make things better either... I think most people are aware of KPML etc - we don't need to tell them that. 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
