On Nov 20, 2008, at 10:45 PM, Elwell, John wrote:
Dean,
-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Willis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 November 2008 23:16
To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Cc: Christer Holmberg; Paul Kyzivat; SIP List; Elwell, John
Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO Framework: Tags
No, you use the options tag with a sip.extensions media feature tag
ala RFC 3840 in order to get a retargeting proxy to send the request
only to the subset of UAS that support the extension.
[JRE] RFC 3841 does not compel a proxy to behave in this way, and in
fact the proxy might not even support RFC 3841.
RFC 3840/3841 can insure such behavior, and (with Proxy-require) can
assure that the proxy either supports the extension or rejects the
call.
So you have to be
prepared for your INVITE/Recv-Info to go to any UAS.
well, it MIGHT do so, and fail in a predictable way as a consequence
due to the Require: info-package. That's not a bad thing.
I don't in general
see a need to specify this as part of the extension in general, but
if a
particular package needs a feature tag, let it define one. Keep the
extension simple.
Only standards-track RFCs can define SIP option tags under RFC 3427,
and we have no plans to relax this requirement.
But we have a much looser policy for INFO packages; most will not be
standards-track.
So, for those sorts of packages, an info-package option tag is
potentially quite useful.
--
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
