From: Aki Niemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ext [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > From: Aki Niemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > - There is a single authoritative notifier agent responsible for any > single resource. > > - A resource is identified using a SIP URI. > > - A subscriber subscribes to a resource using the SIP URI. > > Often a subscriber will send the SUBSCRIBE to a URI which is not the > request-URI of the SUBSCRIBE when it reaches the notifier agent. This > happens due to normal SIP request routing, but the routing can also > change with time.
Correct, but are you saying there might be more than one agent with a different idea on the entity-tags of entities pertaining to a certain resource? In other words, that the resource has multiple agents that may have a different view of the resource state? I believe this is disallowed per RFC3265 already. I doubt things could work with multiple agents that have a different view of the resource state. But there might be multiple agents with different addresses, from whom you request the state of the same resource using different SIP URIs. (Which ultimately might all be destinations reached by sending requests to the same AOR.) I don't think it interferes with the subnot mechanism, but my point is that a resource might *not* have a single, specific SIP URI, either as the request-URI when the SUBSCRIBE reaches the agent(s) which can deliver its state, or as the address to which UAs subscribe. All you need to make subnot work is that every UA agrees on which subscriptions are "for the same resource", and that all notifiers for "the same resource" generate the same etags for the same state, and different etags for different state. Dale _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
