On May 20, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Vikram Chhibber wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to emphasize the need for adapting unsolicited NOTIFY as > a standard. We all are aware of so many commercial applications using > this mechanism. Also, for typical features of presence and > call-processing, user-agents make subscriptions for sip-profile, reg > event, presence/RLS, watcher-info, message waiting indication, > xcap-diff events etc. > > ... > I would like to ask whether there is an effort to address these > issues.
I believe that standardization of unsolicited NOTIFY for the use cases you seem to be considering would have to occur "over the dead bodies" of a large proportion of this working group. They seem to feel very strongly about it. The one case where we used NOTIFY without SUBSCRIBE was REFER, and we ended up having to go back and work around that (norefersub). There have been suggestions to develop a "compound subscription" that might allow a UA to solicit multiple sets of events using a single SUBSCRIBE. I believe this has some potential. The specification process would probably not be straightforward, however, due to the syntax involved. It might also be possible to get the side effect of REGISTER from a SUBSCRIBE, thereby allowing a single compound SUBSCRIBE transaction to replace a REGISTER transaction and multiple SUBSCRIBE transactions. This would also be a non-trivial standardization effort, as it would require absorbing all of the functionality of draft-ietf-sip-outbound into the SUBSCRIBE transaction. -- 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
