Paul,

Yes, I agree. Your argument is a stronger one than the UPDATE argument I
put forward earlier.

John 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 18 October 2007 13:49
> To: Dean Willis
> Cc: sip; Francois Audet; Brian Stucker; Christer Holmberg
> Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO
> 
> I think this problem can be solved with a 2-way exchange. 
> Introducing a 
> 3-way exchange means that the "delayed offer" needed for 3pcc 
> can't be 
> supported in a straightforward way. IMO that is a strong argument 
> against it.
> 
>       Paul
> 
> Dean Willis wrote:
> > 
> > On Oct 17, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
> > 
> >> Why does there need to be a 3-way exchange?
> >> Can the 200-ok have Events listed that weren't offered? 
> (why would it 
> >> bother to?  The offerer didn't say it could do them.)
> >> So isn't the ACK always a mirror image of the 200ok, in 
> which case why 
> >> bother?
> >> Unless you had competing Event types, where only one 
> should be used, 
> >> or couldn't do some combo of them.  And then this concept 
> is getting 
> >> bloated, and will end up looking like SDP capabilities negotiation.
> >>
> > 
> > The only argument I can see is -- it prevents race 
> conditions. Don't 
> > send an event until the ACK.
> > 
> >> And I'm still stuck on your last question, which is what 
> application 
> >> use-case really needs directionality, other than as a nit?
> > 
> > Yeah, me too. Or to rephrase, what application needs "I 
> want to send . . 
> > ." rather than "I understand . . ."
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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
> 


_______________________________________________
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