I'm ok with this, and I thought it had already been settled. Why are we
rehashing it?
Paul
Dean Willis wrote:
On Dec 4, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 7:16 AM
We do allow multipart for legacy INFO (well, at least we don't disallow
it).
Do we need to say anything about the number of packages?
I'm not sure I understand the question. We should say: 1 INFO, 1
package. You make it sound like a package is a body-part. It's not.
A package just defines a specific message use context, and rules
thereof. You can define a info-package that specifies no bodies, for
example.
Adding support for multiple packages, is like asking for a message to
have multiple usage contexts and rules. It makes my head hurt. :)
I concur strongly with this position.
I started thinking about the which-application-do-I-give-this-message-to
API, and realized that for some API models, multiple packages per INFO
would be a major furball. Let's just not go there.
--
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
_______________________________________________
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
