I do not have a real preference, but provided the reason for using 480 vs. 418 is to minimize naïve downgrading from SIPS to SIP, I do not see how option 2, resulting in:
480 Warning: 390 isi.edu "Please use a SIP URI" helps matters. Cheers, Charles > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Audet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 10:59 AM > To: Paul Kyzivat (pkyzivat) > Cc: IETF SIP List > Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-sips-05: 480 vs. 418 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 10:47 > > To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055) > > Cc: IETF SIP List > > Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-sips-05: 480 vs. 418 > > > > I don't know what you mean about Option 1 being opaque to > > automata. It seems to me it provides comparable info to > > Option 2, giving that the UAC knows what it used in the request. > > It means an Automata can not "upgrade" or "downgrade" > automatically with > OPTION 1, as the indication is not a "hard" indication. It is > a Warning > text > that is not standardized, and will vary by language, > operators, region, > etc. > > Best it can do is "record" the Warning text. That can be done > automatically > of course. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
