Christer, OK, it might be simple, but still unnecessary, so why do it. I haven't heard a compelling argument in its favour. Per-package option tags are far more compelling (depending on particular needs of a package), although I agree such packages would need a standards track document.
John > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 21 November 2008 12:16 > To: Elwell, John; DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Dean Willis; Paul Kyzivat > Cc: SIP List > Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO Framework: Tags > > > John, > > What is "un-simple" by defining an option tag value??? We > have done that > many times before... > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Elwell, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 6:46 AM > To: Christer Holmberg; DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Dean Willis; Paul Kyzivat > Cc: SIP List > Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO Framework: Tags > > Christer, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 20 November 2008 22:53 > > To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Dean Willis; Paul Kyzivat > > Cc: SIP List; Elwell, John > > Subject: RE: [Sip] INFO Framework: Tags > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I still think we shall have an option tag for the extension itself. > > > > Eventhough it does not gurantee that the UAS supports specific info > > packages, at least you can use it to help finding a UAS > which supports > > > the extensions (by using the sip.extensions feature tag). > [JRE] I haven't heard a compelling argument for this. Keep it simple. > > > > > And, as Dean said, it can be used with OPTIONS. > [JRE] And I haven't heard a compelling argument for this. Keep it > simple. > > John > _______________________________________________ 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
