Cullen, I think there was some confusion or miscommunication - it was my impression that what you asked for previously was for just *one* use-case/scenario where 4474 doesn't work the way we'd like, so the WG could focus on that one case and decide if it's legitimate to drive for a different mechanism. I think that's why John presented just one case. But at the mic it sounded more like you wanted to know *all* scenarios we thought should be handled.
Which is it? -hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Cullen Jennings > > Hmm, I don't think anyone made quite that argument. Personally, I'd > rather spend time thinking about the problems that were presented > today in the meeting than repeat previous discussions. > > Cullen <with my individual hat on> _______________________________________________ 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
