I'm going to abstain from this particular issue from now on.
I don't see any good use for this option, but its not worth arguing more
about.
Thanks,
Paul
Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi,
ISTM that the kinds of failures that will result from inappropriate
use of Require:199 are self limiting. They will break things early in
interop testing, and be fixed.
You are refreshingly optimistic. :) Have you read 3GPP specs recently?
In theory their behavior should be self-limiting too; but it works in
their closed single-vendor environments on day-1, then
breaks on day-2 when the environment grows or another vendor is added.
And since the new vendor being added is the one with motivation to make
things work, the new vendor is the one that will add 199
support. Then one day the customer will want to connect their network
to others, and boom.
If we can't think of any legitimate use for an option-tag in Require,
why should we allow it?
Because there may be a legitimate use for it tomorrow, or next week, or
next year.
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
