On Oct 11, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Francois Audet wrote:

Hi Dean,

Can you tell me what is the difference between "contextually-adapted
INFO", and a "subscription embedded in the INVITE, with the NOTIFY
using the same dialog"? I don't see any advantage to the INFO approach.


One might argue that the second is a means of implementing the first.

INFO, as written, lacks contextual negotiation. You're proposing to replace the method name with NOTIFY and use the event-package framework for content and context expression, using a header-field in the INVITE request to engage context negotiation. It seems to me like that would work. There's nothing "implicit" about it, and it is no worse for overhead than using Supported or Allow. It also has the advantage of letting us reuse an existing registration framework, IANA process, and specification review process under RFC 3427. Very tidy, I think I like it.

I would argue that it would be nice to have an extension mechanism that allows a UA to be asked "Do you support this specific extension?" without the UA having to encode every extension it supports in every request it sends, but that's a different issue.


It seems to me we already have a mechanism for asking for asynchroous
information with subscriptions. Why not use that?


As you pointed out, the current mechanism adds a dialog overhead. It also raises issues with event-stream correlation that can be a bit of a challenge depending on the application's API and threading model. Your suggested workaround for in-dialog notification relieves these issues, so it may be better than the existing mechanism for a number of use cases. More importantly, it is no worse than NOTIFY for those use cases (barring the small increase in request size for context negotiation).

--
Dean




_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to