On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:47 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:24 PM
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.
It occurs to me maybe we're talking past each other. When I think
of the *Require* header, I think of what does any random endpoint/
gateway getting this request have to support for this to succeed. I
can see no value in having that behavior, and plenty of harm in
doing so. I don't want a UAC maker to ever think it can require
UAS' to implement 199 in order for its request to succeed.
But maybe what you're talking about is *Proxy-Require*?
For each options tag, the RFC defining it should discuss when it is
used in requests by the UAC.
It might be reasonable to give guidance about NOT using one; that is
not using it in a Require. But the level of guidance, I think, is a
SHOULD NOT. This needs to be explained: What happens if you do it
anyhow? the answer is not "the network breaks", but "any UAS not
supporting this feature will reject the request. Since this feature is
only an optimization over previous behavior, rejecting a request over
this lack is very likely to be undesirable behavior. Don't be stupid."
--
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
