On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 16:33 -0500, Scott Lawrence wrote: > Please change that name to 'sipxecs-branchid'. The convention of > requiring that non-standardized ids always start with 'x-' has been > officially abandoned in SIP, and no one else should be using our product > name in their names, so it is unique enough.
This is discussed in draft-peterson-rai-rfc3427bis-04, section 4, which has been approved by the IESG but is still in the RFC Editor's queue. I'll make appropriate updates to my References draft. On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 17:06 -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" ) I'm not sure that they're consonant with the References proposal as it now stands, as the proposal is about correlation entirely at the dialog level, not the transaction level. Instead, why don't we put an additional section in the I-D describing sipXbridge's extensions. On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 23:30 -0500, M. Ranganathan wrote: > Thanks for your reply. I understand how to interpret the rel parameter > but I do not understand what use one can make of it. 'rel' is useful if a single dialog is related to a number of different dialogs, and one is only interested in certain aspects of the dialog. For instance, if you are trying to debug a call pick-up problem, rel=inquiry is interesting but rel=chain is not. Dale _______________________________________________ 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/
