Dean,
I agree that "will" is problematic, but I was having trouble coming up
with a suitable word. Maybe I can just use a lot of words instead:
Instead of *could* be used, perhaps "capable of using" is better.
Equivalent to Supported.
By *may* I meant that if there is a need to signal this sort of thing,
then this mechanism MUST be used to do it.
So, Alice says:
I am capable of sending and receiving DTMF via this INFO technique.
(And at the same time may also be offering the telephone-events
payload type in the SDP.)
And then Bob says:
I am capable of sending DTMF via this INFO technique.
I select that this INFO technique will be the technique I use to
send DTMF to you. I don't receive DTMF this way, so don't send it
to me.
(And at the same time rejects the telephone-events
payload type in the SDP answer.)
Paul
Dean Willis wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
It seems to me that there is a need to know what *will* be used as
well as what *could* be used. This is especially the case when there
are multiple possible mechanisms to accomplish the same thing and one
is being chosen. That is the situation with DTMF.
I'm still thinking at the level of what "MAY" be used. We don't know
what "will" be used until it happens. Sometimes those decisions aren't
made until runtime -- and sometimes, they never get made at all.
As Douglas Adams points out, the invention of time travel will have
caused a change to human language, eliminating the future perfect tense,
as the future will have been found not to have been perfect. Or
something like that.
--
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
