Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi,
Most of the multipart cases I've seen have worked fine, because the
Content-Type normally tells everything the receiver needs to know (e.g.
SDP, ISUP, XML-whatever, etc).
I guess the potential problem is when you send things like image/jpeg
etc.
The scary part is that demuxing based on C-T *does* work in a lot of
simple cases, so it may be used widely. But it doesn't work in general.
To work generally, it will be necessary to first demux based on C-D.
If we have a lot of implementations basing things on C-T, then they may
not be inserting, or doing the necessary processing for C-D. That means
they are likely to break in more complex cases going forward.
For info packages, I still don't understand why we can't specify a
common content-type value. The body part contains an info package, so
the content-typ is info something.
If you chose a standard C-T for all info-packages, that constrains the
syntax that it may contain. Yet each package is going to want to choose
the syntax(es) that it uses. And some of them will want to be standard
ones, such as image/jpeg. To deal with that your "standard" info C-T
would have to be a container for an arbitrary mime type. So you have
simply pushed the problem down a level.
That way we would solve the how-to-find-info-body-parts problem, and
whatever common stuff then needs to be done for SIP can be done outside
the work of info.
IMO its a really bad way to go.
Thanks,
Paul
Regards,
Christer
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Hadriel Kaplan
Sent: 3. joulukuuta 2008 0:42
To: Dean Willis
Cc: SIP List
Subject: Re: [Sip] Multiple body-parts in one INFO
-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Willis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 4:07 PM
Seriously - you expect us to put in a Require header
option-tag when
multi-part mime is used, so it can fail against every SIP device
that is deployed on the planet??
If understanding how to decode the multipart MIME is
critical to the
success of the request, then I expect the request to fail
if the UAS
cannot decode it. Further, I want it to fail predictably in
a way that
the request originator can understand, not in some cryptic
application/version dependent way.
What you are suggesting is that to use multi-part MIME in
current SIP methods, we cannot rely on currently deployed
system behavior. So you're basically proposing we either:
1) Never do multi-part MIME.
2) Do a new SIP version.
I'm ok with doing #1, but I don't think things are *that* bad
anyway. I think we can rely on systems to behave sanely
enough to do a backwards-compatible multi-part that should
work in most cases - for the cases it doesn't, I think it
will fail explicitly (with a failure response), and *then*
one can argue if you can re-send it without the other body
parts, or if you just fail the call hard. But at least by
then you've actually hit an error, and it's not ALL deployed
systems that will have the problem.
Although I do wonder about how much of a Red Herring this
topic is - what exact use-cases do you guys have for
multi-part bodies in SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, PUBLISH, and INFO
that is not actually defined in a package for them? Or are
we in some theoretical La-La land? [no offense meant - I like
La-La land]
-hadriel
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
