> -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Jeroen van Bemmel wrote: > > All in all, IMO using INFO instead of NOTIFY here is preferrable (also > > given that existing implementations already use INFO within INVITE > > dialogs). > > No matter what we do, the existing standardized uses of INFO will remain. > > And I think it is safe to assume that the existing *unstandardized* uses > of INFO will not do the kind of negotiation we are talking about, so > they won't carry over directly. > > So we are really only talking about new things.
Actually, I'm not so sure of that. I don't know how many would do it, but I think making it as painless/trivial as possible increases the odds of implementation and thus upgrade. And following Christer's point, I think it also gives an existence proof that INFO as a method will make it through most anything along the path to the UA. -hadriel p.s. FWIW, I know my employer would implement it; but I don't think it matters much to us whether it's Notify or Info. _______________________________________________ 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
