El Sábado 04 Abril 2009, Paul Kyzivat escribió: > why do you find that crazy?
Basically I expect nobody will implement such feature. Perhaps I miss something (I've not read the corresponding RFC/draft) but if UA1, in conversation with UA2, sends a DTMF, then UA2 already receives it without the need of subscribing to them. If a proxy between UA1 and UA2 wants to know the DTMF presses of UA1, then UA1 could use SIP INFO. I expect that getting an UA using SIP INFO instead of RFC2833 is easier than expecting UA to implement this "DTMF subscription package". Or perhaps this feature allows UA3 receiving notifications about DTMF presses from UA1 to UA2. I consider this no useful. Too much "happy" in my opinion, I can't see all those happy features working in the real world (please, note that in the real world, Alice doesn't speak with Bob through two proxies). Too much subscription packages defined in too much RFC's. Which is the reality? or perhaps it doesn't matter? Sorry for being so pessimist on these subjects, but I try to be close to reality. Regards. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
