Yes, I agree with Christer. (wow!)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 20:52 > To: Elwell, John; Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); IETF SIP List > Subject: RE: [Sip] How to make draft-ietf-sip-199 more useful > > > Hi, > > >I would like to make draft-ietf-sip-199 more useful by expanding it's > capabilities. > > > >I would like to add a REQ-2 that allows that the Proxy to > indicate WHY > >the dialog was terminated. > > > >This would be done by having the 199 response include (as a sifrag or > >watever) the actual error response that terminated the dialog. At a > >minimum it would include the value of the error code itself. > > > >I would like to add text in the second-to-last paragraph of > section one > >that explains that the reason for specific dialogs to be > terminated may > >be useful for the client to take appropriate action (for example, by > >re-attempting a call to a specific branch when the error is > >recoverable). > >[JRE] But how would the re-attempted call to a specific branch be > achieved? What goes in the Request-URI - the received > >Contact URI? Then presumably Route header fields would need > to be added > based on Record-Routes from the previous dialog? > >Or if the Contact URI has GRUU properties, I guess Route > isn't needed. > But what if a temporary GRUU - would it still be > >valid? > > Those are interesting questions, but go beyond the scope of the draft. > > My proposal is to add text about including the original > response code, but NOT specify procedures for solving HERFP > problems etc. > > Regards, > > Christer > > _______________________________________________ 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
