On 7/19/07 7:15 PM, Jeroen van Bemmel wrote:
Good points, some nits inline
Good nits. Some responses inline.
Why are we doing this so very, very wrong? It's almost as if we've
gone out of our way to violate both the spirit AND the law of feature
tag handling in as many ways as possible. Most annoyingly, we get
exactly the desired behavior if we just do things the way they're
described in
3261. To wit:
* If a client supports outbound, it includes "Supported: outbound"
in all REGISTER requests, regardless of whether the specific
request makes use of that extension.
[jvb] this would probably be a MUST, right?
Well, we're not strengthening 3261 -- so I believe it's a SHOULD in all
requests, and a MUST in REGISTERs that make use of the extension.
* The registrar includes "Require: outbound" in any REGISTER
requests to which outbound behavior is being applied.
[jvb] you mean responses
Right.
* The registrar is free to include "Supported: outbound" in any
responses it generates -- and it means exactly what 3261 intends
it to mean: that outbound is *supported*, but is not being
applied to the response in question.
[jvb] is not _necessarily_ being applied, it depends on presence of
Require: outbound (only). Guess this is a MAY, right?
I believe you are correct on both counts.
/a
_______________________________________________
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
