I think that 2 is the best. Maybe a BCP level document explaining the use case you described and hope that it will encourage implementations.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Dean Willis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 12:30 > To: Hadriel Kaplan > Cc: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); SIP IETF; Paul Kyzivat; Dan WING > Subject: Re: [Sip] E.164 - who owns it > > > On Apr 13, 2008, at 1:17 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: > > > > So where do we go from here? > > Option 1) Ignore it. This may only be a minor population > of the sip > > community; or they may fix it themselves someday; or it may > not be a > > real problem if they keep doing what they're doing. > > Option 2) Figure out how to make tel more successful. > > Option 3) Figure out how to make sip with user=phone a true alias. > > Option 4) ?? > > > > I'm inclined to 2 or 3. As the discussion has noted, > user=phone is at best a trifle underdocumented. Either 2 or 3 > requires additional spec work; but at lest the problem is > tractable this way. > > -- > Dean > > _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.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
