> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Willis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:05 PM
> To: Paul Kyzivat
> Cc: sip; Francois Audet; Brian Stucker; Christer Holmberg
> Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>
> > The "bundled subscriptions" need to be negotiated in both
> > directions. That means something like:
> >
> > INVITE must contain:
> > - these are the events I am willing to send
> > - these are the events I desire to receive
>
> Do we need that first line ? Or do we just need "These are the events
> I'm willing to receive. If I get them, great. If I don't, well, I
> don't care, I'll assume that sending them wasn't important to you."

But that's not always the case with dtmf.  If a softphone makes a call, would 
the softphone always care to receive DTMF?  Not all of them would.  But they 
would want to tell the far-end they can _send_ DTMF.  Not that I think this 
means we need a send/receive distinction - I think just a "I support dtmf-info" 
semantic is good enough for dtmf.


> Is there a use case for turning this into a full bidirectional offer-
> answer?

I guess the question is if it matters that a UA which can only send event foo 
but can't do anything useful receiving foo, could be sent foo anyway.  For 
example, suppose we created an event-package for a jpeg picture, for 
remote-party call display.  If a hard-phone has no LCD to display a picture, 
but has a stored jpeg to give to the far-end, would it matter if it can't say 
"I can send a jpeg but don't want to receive one"?  Obviously it could just 
accept a received one (ie, 200 ok the INFO) and discard the jpeg.  But is that 
the right thing to do?  I dunno.  We could just leave the concept up to 
specific info-event-package definitions to handle - i.e., make an event-package 
define send vs. receive event-packages pairs if it cares about it.

-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

Reply via email to