I read over the draft in last call requesting new RPH namespace assignments.
In and of itself it looks non-objectionable. While I don't
understand the need for that many name spaces, or those specific
values, my first reaction is to say "okay" anyway.
However, I went and looked at RFC4412, which defines the header
namespace registration.
That RFC calls for a standard track RFC for defining namespaces.
And the text is quite explicit that one should not create a
multiplicity of namespaces, but should try to use existing spaces first.
So, unless we want to check RFC4412, it seems that the request for 32
namespaces in
draft-ietf-sip-rph-new-namespaces-00.txt
really needs more explanation / justification.
Yours,
Joel M. Halpern
_______________________________________________
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
