(As individual) At the moment, it may be that there is a useful information or BCP that could back the existing mechansisms up, but I am not seeing in this thread at the moment a significant justification for a new extension.
And of course such an informational or BCP would only exist if someone volunteered to draft one. Regards Keith > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Dean Willis > Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:10 PM > To: Christer Holmberg > Cc: Bob Penfield; [email protected]; Paul Kyzivat; Elwell, John > Subject: Re: [Sip] Dual registration without Outbound > > > On Oct 17, 2008, at 3:08 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > The please-perform-parallel-forking-to-the-same-intance-id > extension > > indication would then be brought as a separate draft. > > > > Do we need such an extension when there is a workaround -- > using different instance-id? > > -- > 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
