Dean Willis wrote: > We've been batting INFO around for many, many years now (like, 10 -- > it predates the SIP working group). A couple of meetings back, we > agreed that we would discuss use cases for INFO packages, and if we > didn't find any consensus there, then we would go ahead and publish an > "INFO Considered Harmful" RFC. > > We tried having this discussion at the last IETF, but that just didn't > work out. > > Do we try again, or just give up and publish "INFO Considered Harmful"? > > Personally, I don't care anymore -- I just want to drive a stake into > the heart of this undead-thing, cut off its head, stuff the mouth with > holy wafers, and bury it at a crossroads somewhere.
I gave my try, very unsuccessfully. So I just want to remind you not to forget the garlic, the silver cross, and the sunlight. > But this WG only slays by consensus, so what do you want? > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
