The original draft for INFO (like most from that time) were pretty
loosely worded. That is part of the trouble. So its been necessary to
interpret intent.
It seems clear that the original definition was intended to convey
information that was closely tied to the session. Without a session that
doesn't make sense.
The current effort to clarify this (the info package work submitted by
Eric Burger, and subject to vigorous debate recently) will certainly
nail it down further. That is proposing to *negotiate* the packages to
be delivered, and the negotiation takes place within the invite dialog
usage. (Much like offer/answer.) This ties INFO more closely to the session.
If you have an application for INFO outside of the invite dialog usage,
then you could submit a draft proposing that. I wouldn't recommend doing
so. It wouldn't be well received.
Thanks,
Paul
Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
El Sábado, 1 de Noviembre de 2008, Paul Kyzivat escribió:
See RFC 5057.
I promise I'll read it entirely, but in a fast read I don't find what you
could suggest, just considerations about dialog forming.
Could you please point to me what exactly you mean? Perhaps that INFO
shouldn't be used as an initial request?
Thanks a lot.
_______________________________________________
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
