I asked:
> 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? Several people (Jonathan, Mary, Christer, Paul) have responded to the list with various things that added up to "Publish INFO packages AND document the extension models for SIP". So far, nobody has suggested otherwise. Does anybody want to do anything else? Speak now or forever visualize whirled peas. -- 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
