Hi, >I don't have a problem agreeing with that. > >Note that buried somewhere in this thread was a question of whether we had a use case for multiple packages per dialog, or can we simplify even further.
I don't think we should go that far, because that could become very restrictive. For example, assume I want to use INFO packages e.g. for DTMF during the call setup, and then other INFO package(s) for something else during the call. Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 10:51 AM > To: Elwell, John; Dean Willis; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger; Paul Kyzivat > Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages > per INFO > > > Hi, > > I agree with John. Let's keep it simple. If allowing multiple packages > in a single INFO causes issues, let's forget about it. > > The whole idea with this is to allow people using INFO to do so in an > easy and standardized way, so let's not shoot ourselves in the foot > with complexity. > > Regards, > > Christer > > -----Original Message----- > From: Elwell, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 23. lokakuuta 2008 12:30 > To: Christer Holmberg; Dean Willis; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger; Paul Kyzivat > Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages > per INFO > > In reply to this whole thread, please bear in mind that we had lots of > discussion about whether it would be worthwhile defining this new INFO > mechanism, since existing applications are unlikely to change and the > best we can hope for is that new applications will exploit the new > mechanism. Therefore we want to keep the mechanism as simple as > possible. The complexities of matching body parts to header fields, > dealing with cases where only some of the packages are understood, > etc. > are hardly likely to persuade people to implement the mechanism. > Please keep it simple. > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of > > Christer Holmberg > > Sent: 23 October 2008 08:17 > > To: Dean Willis; DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > > Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger; Paul Kyzivat > > Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages > > per INFO > > > > > > Hi, > > > > >>Why does putting two different packages in the same INFO > > work better > > >>than two different INFO messages each with their own > > package usage? Is > > > > >>there a desirable relationship that can be implemented > > between the two > > > > >>that we would otherwise lose? > > > > > >We have one package per NOTIFY. Let's stick with one package > > per INFO, > > unless we want to go back to using mime-types as the only > > distinguisher of packages. > > > > I raised that issue in another e-mail. > > > > But, never the less, I have no strong feelings on the single versus > > multiple package issue. > > > > Regards, > > > > Christer > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
