Hi Juha, Since there seems to be different opinions on whether CRLF has already been implemented by everyone, whether an indication is needed etc, what is wrong with what you proposed earlier, that the draft would not explicitly forbid sending CRLF even if keep=yes is not returned? That would work both for those who think an indication is needed and those (including yourself) who don't think it's not needed. Regards, Christer
________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Juha Heinanen Sent: Fri 09/05/2008 07:48 To: Dean Willis Cc: [email protected]; Francois Audet; Christer Holmberg Subject: Re: [Sip] Draft: draft-holmberg-sip-keep-00.txt Dean Willis writes: > It's about keeping your NAT binding alive and KNOWING that it is > alive, rather than just hoping. That requires bidirectional traffic. yes and as i have said many times, CRLF has already been implemented in ser and openser proxies. -- juha _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
