Hi Paul,

Now I understand what you mean - I mixed up things a little.

The question is: shall we really use the Info-Package header. And, if
so, shall we use it in the way as currently described by the draft?


Shouldn't we use Content-Type to indicate what is in the message body?
After all, we may need Content-Length etc.

So, there would be two options:


1. Use Content-Type to indicate info-package, and within the package
itself then indicate the exact package type

Example: Content-Type: application/info-package


2. Use Content-Type to indicate info-package AND exact package type

Example: Content-Type: application/info-package.foo


...or something like that.


Then, if you have multiple packages, you would use Content-Type:
multipart/mixed on the SIP level, and Content-Type
application/info-package within the mimes (normal multipart handling).

Regards,

Christer






 

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 22. lokakuuta 2008 16:36
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger
Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages per
INFO



Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Doesn't the body handling draft say that one MUST be able to parse 
> multipart message bodies?
> 
> So, I don't think we should forbid the usage of multiple packages. 
> There MAY be use-cases where it is useful, so...
> 
> I also think that the negotiation of multipart support is more 
> generic, so such mechanism should not be bound to INFO packages.

My thinking was:

If multipart is used to convey multiple info packages, then each part
that contains an info package should contain an Info-Package header
stating which package it is. That was an alternative to Eric's proposal
that all the packages be listed at the outer level.

Then the question remained: in this case should there be an Info-Package
header at the outer level, and if so, what should it contain?

Answering that question is what led to my proposing the "multipart"
package.

I guess an alternative would be for the Info-Package header at the outer
level to list all the packages contained, in no particular order, and
then for the individual parts to contain an Info-Package describing that
part.

I do think it is necessary for there to be an Info-Package header at the
outer level, to distinguish this from a legacy use of Info.

        Thanks,
        Paul

> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: 21. lokakuuta 2008 17:45
> To: SIP IETF; Eric Burger
> Subject: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages per 
> INFO
> 
> Re the question about multiple packages per INFO:
> 
>     There MUST be exactly one Info Package type listed per
Info-Package
>     header.  Multiple Info-Packages per INFO message are disallowed.
> 
>     [EDITOR NOTE: Really?  Why not multiple Info-Packages, in a
>     multipart/mime?  Well, I thought of one: it is hard to
disambiguate.
>     For example, take an INFO message with an Info-Package: key_image,
>     caller_picture.  I then have a multipart/mime with, you guessed
it,
>     an image/jpeg and an image/jpeg.  I would offer we do allow this
and
>     require the MIME parse order of the body match the order of the
> Info-
>     Package enumerations; if you have too many packages or body parts
or
>     they do not align, you barf.  However, I timed out on this and
thus
>     we will have to wait for the next version for me to flesh this
out.
>     If we do do this, then we'll reference RFC 3261 as updated by
>     draft-ietf-sip-body-handling to require multipart MIME handling.]
> 
> How about defining an initial package type of "multipart". It allows 
> only content-type multipart/mixed. Then each contained type must have 
> its own Info-Package header. If you want to allow multiple packages 
> per INFO then you need to negotiate support for "multipart". Or maybe 
> we require support of multipart if you support any other package type.
> 
>       Thanks,
>       Paul
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to