Does it make sense to specify some text that says that till the time a NOTIFY is received, the subscriber can assume an implicit NOTIFY with Subscription-State:active and an empty body (ie no extra state provided) ? When a NOTIFY is received, it re-freshes the last state. Then implementations have a standard guidance of what to do between getting 200 OK for SUB and following NOTIFY
This way, from an _implementation_ perspective, if the subscriber was already subscribed before and has the state information for the old subscription, it could choose to display that state information to the user, or, in the case that it really was a new subscription and it needs the state information but the notifier chose to throttle a response, it can choose to display a 'in progress' icon to the user or whatever else it chooses. regds arjun On 2/21/06, Brett Tate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Understand the reasoning behind notify in the first > > notify for a subscribe but for a refresh we should > > have put the ability in rfc 3265 to send only a > > confirmation (e.g. empty notify) that will not load > > the network and will not require the presence server > > to get the presence information from the whatever > > repository it is using. > > RFC 3265 leaves it to extensions and event packages to define the > corresponding optimizations. > > However I agree that it might be beneficial to create a generic mechanism > to > suppress the NOTIFY or the full state aspects of it when both devices > think > the event package data does not need to be resynchronized. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > -- Arjun Roychowdhury _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
