2010/4/9 Paul Kyzivat :
> Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 wrote:
>> It could be that they did not anticipate the buddy list to very large
>> one.
>
> Or it could be that they expected that the implementors would support
> TCP, as 3261 requires them to do.
Then, the pain of HTTP/XCAP wouldn't be required,
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of prashanth.me
[prashanth...@globaledgesoft.com]
Suppose consider the tel uri, "tel:863-1234;phone-context=+1-914-555"
The phone-context param
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Vavilapalli
Srikanth-A19563 [srikan...@motorola.com]
Not sure why RFC mandates/recommends to keep the entire buddy list info
in the first NO
Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 wrote:
> It could be that they did not anticipate the buddy list to very large
> one.
Or it could be that they expected that the implementors would support
TCP, as 3261 requires them to do.
Thanks,
Paul
> Regards
> Ranjit
>
> -Original Message---
2010/4/9 Avasarala Ranjit-A20990 :
>
> It could be that they did not anticipate the buddy list to very large
> one.
Or it would be that the whole mechanism to mantain a buddylist with
SIMPLE/XCAP is a pain, by handling two different protocols (SIP and
HTTP) and a complex relationship between them
It could be that they did not anticipate the buddy list to very large
one.
Regards
Ranjit
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563
Sent: Friday, April 09, 20
There was also an example given in RFC 4662 in Section 6 at Page 20..
3. As is required by RFC 3265 [2], the RLS sends a NOTIFY immediately
upon accepting the subscription. In this example, we are assuming that
the local RLS is also an authority for presence information for the
users in the "va
2010/4/9 prashanth.me :
> Hi,
>
> As per the RFC 3966, In section 3. URI Syntax
>
> The syntax definition follows RFC 2396 [RFC2396], indicating the actual
> characters
> contained in the URI. If the reserved characters "+", ";", "=", and "?"
> are used
> as delimiters between
Hi,
As per the RFC 3966, In section 3. URI Syntax
The syntax definition follows RFC 2396 [RFC2396], indicating the actual
characters
contained in the URI. If the reserved characters "+", ";", "=", and "?"
are used
as delimiters between components of the "tel" URI, they MUST
Forwarding to SIMPLE mailing list...
-Original Message-
From: Pandurangan R S [mailto:pandurangan@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 12:07 PM
To: Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on RFC 4662 - Resourc
10 matches
Mail list logo
