Yes, my thinking has been that this would be a matter of negotiating the
use of NOTIFY *within* the invite-dialog-usage. Of course that isn't
legal today - this would be an extension to both 3261 and 3265.
Paul
Elwell, John wrote:
Michael,
Yes, I guess some of the postings on this thread have hinted that it
would be the same dialog usage. I suppose if the subscriptions are
deemed to terminate at the time of the BYE transaction, then it would
indeed by the same dialog usage. So it would appear to be within the
letter of the dialogusage draft. However, one or two postings have
suggested different.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Procter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 October 2007 08:48
To: Elwell, John; Adam Roach; Paul Kyzivat
Cc: sip; Brian Stucker
Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO
John,
My impression of the discussion so far is that using NOTIFY (or INTIFY
as Christer suggests) in this way would not constitute a new
dialog-usage. A new usage would imply periodic resubscription and
specific termination, whereas sending INTIFY within the context of the
INVITE-usage means that the lifetime issues can be ignored: terminate
the call, and INTIFY no longer has a context.
This neatly avoids violating the letter of the dialogusage draft, but
you could probably argue that creating sub-usages of the INVITE-usage
isn't necessarily in keeping with the spirit of the draft...
Regards,
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Elwell, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 October 2007 07:41
To: Adam Roach; Paul Kyzivat
Cc: sip; Brian Stucker
Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO
Adam,
Now that you have reminded us of the dialogusage draft, perhaps it
would
be appropriate to remind people of the following from the abstract:
"This memo argues that multiple dialog usages should be avoided. It
discusses alternatives to their use and clarifies essential behavior
for
elements that cannot currently avoid them."
In other words, while it will only be an Informational RFC, it seems
to
deprecate introduction of further dialog reuses. So if we were to go
with NOTIFY, would this be a new dialog usage, and if so,
do we really
want to go ahead with something in contradiction to the sentiment of
that recently-approved draft?
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Roach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 October 2007 01:05
To: Paul Kyzivat
Cc: sip; Brian Stucker
Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO
Paul Kyzivat wrote:
I mostly agree with Adam. The place where I take exception
is INFO. It
is my impression that INFO was designed for use with INVITE, and
so
should be considered to be part of an invite-dialog-usage.
And Robert
specified it that way in the dialogusage draft.
You're correct. I had forgotten about that, and the dialogusage
draft
does make it clear: INFO is part of the INVITE usage. RFC
2976 predates
the current terminology, but a quick re-read does show that
it's pretty
clearly appropriate only for INVITE usages.
/a
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
