On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 17:33 -0500, M. Ranganathan wrote:
> 
> > I would in fact love to see these become standard parameter names
> with
> > well defined semantics if Dale would agree to include these in his
> > next draft.
> >
> > (i.e. "branchId" and "method" )

> The additions I would like to make would enable inferences to be made
> about how transactions relate to each other within related dialogs. I
> do not know if the original draft intended to address that.

Certainly the idea has always been to provide information on the
semantic relationships.  I can see how brandId adds to that, but I think
that method actually detracts from it.  It's not important, for example,
whether a reINVITE on one side was caused by a REFER or by a reINVITE on
the other - what's important is that they are the same call.


_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list [email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to