On Mar 10, 2008, at 4:47 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > Lets contrast this to how this need to know all changes plays out > *without* subnot-etags. > > If you maintain an unbroken subscription without etags, you will > receive > every notification. (In the absence of throttling - see below.) If the > state changes from A to B to A then you will know that. Using etags > makes no sense. > > If you instead poll rather than maintaining a subscription, and don't > use etags, then if the state changes from A to B to A and your polls > miss the time when the state is B, you have no way of knowing you > missed > anything. Adding etags does not change this. It just minimizes the > data > transfer on the second poll. > > Note also that in the past this has come up in the context of event > throttling. When event notification is throttled you also can miss > certain states. > > So it seems there has never been any intent to support the requirement > to be aware of every state transition.
Works for me. I talked with Aki this afternoon, and have asked him to just add the or three needed to make sure that readers don't assume that eTags give them something they didn't already have -- versioning. I believe this will clear up EKR's comment as well. I'd like him to review Aki's new text when it becomes available. So I think the issue is effectively closed for now, barring some wordsmithing that I do not expect will require meeting agenda time. -- Dean _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.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
