Hadriel,
I understand your logic. BUT are we agreed that we should be making
non-backward-compatible normative changes to 3261 (or any of the key
RFCs) for reasons other than correcting out and out errors and
ambiguities? Seems like that is the start of SIP/3.0.
Paul
Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
Yeah I've been thinking about what you said the other day about this, and I
think I understand your point, but I still think MUST's and an update to 3261
would be good, for the following reasons:
1) We really should want to change 3261 to say MUST NOT put an
ip-address/hostname in the call-id. Really in 20/20 hindsight I don't think it
should have had one to begin with.
2) It's easier for customers to force vendors to do something if there's a MUST
statement, standards-track RFC, vs. an informational recommendation/should.
3) Endpoint UAC vendors should do it *before* getting deployed and being told
by customers to change after-wards. Specifically I'm thinking about vendors
who don't attend IETF and aren't that up-to-speed on all the nuances and such.
An update to 3261 with normative mandatory language is clearer, I think.
-hadriel
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Roach [mailto:a...@nostrum.com]
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 4:20 PM
Which is why an informational draft explaining the problem is useful,
while a normative document... not quite so much.
Tell UACs: "If you include machine names in your Call-IDs, B2BUAs will
have reason to change them." There's no MUST or MUST NOT here, just an
explanation of rationale.
Tell B2BUAs: "If a Call-ID doesn't contain an @ sign, you'll do everyone
a favor by not changing them, because it allows proper correlation of
related transactions an dialogs." Again, no MUST; no MUST NOT. Just
cause and effect.
Then see if people want to play nice. The market will sort out if that's
valuable or not.
/a
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implement...@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipp...@ietf.org 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 sip-implement...@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipp...@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
