As Jonathan noted, there is a clear need for something, as I don't see folks giving up on using INFO at all and providing some structure/standardization around the use is a good thing. The following documents are a good starting place IMHO: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-sip-info-use-cases-01.txt http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-sip-info-events-01.txt http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kaplan-sipping-dtmf-package-00.txt
As far as providing guidelines on what approaches folks should use depending upon requirements and problem statements, I agree with Jonathan that a document of this sort would be useful, perhaps using this document as a starting point: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-rosenberg-sip-info-litmus-00.txt We would of course need to decide how to partition the work either using the traditional SIP/SIPPING split of new SIP headers, etc. in SIP and event packages, informational docs, etc. in SIPPING or possibly consider this as a test case for your (Dean's) proposal of starting new WGs for new work items, since it would seem that in the end there could be a reasonable handful of work items to progress and the work could be fairly tightly scoped. Although, I fear this group would have the same difficulty in reaching a stopping point as SIP/SIPPING in terms of folks wanting to define new INFO event packages. Likely, the most contentious topic of debate is whether we need to define a general extensibility model. Given we don't have a lot of use cases (other than cases where we've already completed work or well on the way to completing), it's kinda tough to say that if we build it, folks will use it. So, personally, my opinion would be to defer this topic until we see a real need, although I realize there's a risk of not being able to deliver this in a timely manner if we wait, particularly given past history on how quickly we can complete work items. However, in one sense I feel that it's just way too late to do this sort of thing (at least in SIP 2.0). Mary. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Willis Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 5:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Sip] INFO and what to do about it? 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. 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
