What was "the work Paul started"? You mean Eric's draft? -hadriel
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Robert Sparks > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:28 PM > To: Paul Kyzivat > Cc: [email protected]; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS > Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO and what to do about it? > > Paul's two points resonate with me. > > Does anyone expect that if we _did_ build a usage framework for INFO, > that we would somehow take the existing uses and retroactively declare > them standard and part of that framework without change? > > If that were possible, what's the difference between that and just > documenting them as is and declaring them standard without this > framework. > > So I don't see how building this framework will solve the kind of > problem that Martin was punctation-charactering about. > > As Paul points out, creating the framework might provide better > interoperability for some _new_ use, but the level of effort someone > would have to go through to get the usage standardized is not going to > be easier than standardizing it on its own. So having its not going to > do the person that wants a nifty new feature any real good. > > If we had a truckload of things that would use the framework bursting > at the seams waiting for the framework, we'd all, I'm betting, > happily work very quickly to create it. I don't see this truckload of > things. The existing uses are out there and they're not going to > change (so far when I've asked folks with features build on INFO if > they'd change their code to use this framework once it existed, > they've laughed). > > So if we do anything at all, I'd favor finishing the work Paul started. > > RjS _______________________________________________ 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
