Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi,
The "bundled subscriptions" need to be negotiated in both directions.
That means something like:
INVITE must contain:
- these are the events I am willing to send
- these are the events I desire to receive
response must contain:
- these are the events I will send (subset from invite)
- these are the events you should send (subset from invite)
Maybe we could re-use the SDP direction attributes (sendrecv,
sendonly,
recvonly) for this?
Are you serious? Or have you been smoking something? :-)
Sometimes I think that would help in these discussions :)
Certainly you can use the SDP direction attributes if you
want to establish media sessions for this event signaling.
But AFAIK the point here is to negotiate the use of signaling
in the sip session itself.
I guess I should have been more clear. I didn't mean that we start using
SDP for this, but that we could use something SIMILAR to the direction
attributes - but in the form of some SIP header parameters.
Oh - thats not quite so crazy.
Yes, I suppose something like that could be done. But given how much
confusion that seems to have caused with SDP, I would certainly think
twice before using it again.
Note that this will need to be more than a one-time negotiation. Its
possible that the agreement will need to be renegotiated in mid-call.
(This comes up at least in 3pcc scenarios, where a device in the middle
is performing a transfer without the knowledge of the other side.)
Paul
_______________________________________________
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
