> -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 2:04 PM > > But, my question is still: what makes support of multiple packages > un-simple? Based on the discussions we had on the list before the IETF > meeting, I thought there were no problems.
>From a protocol perspective: you'd have to define that more than one package >name can be indicated in an INFO, that they have to use cid or some means to >identify which body part is which package's, and you'd have to handle the case >when the receiver can process one/some package body parts but not another. >It's not truly "free" to add this. It adds time and complexity to the draft. >For example, what if you received an INFO with two packages of the same >package name? Is that ok? Which gets processed first? >From a developer's perspective: you'd have to read a bigger RFC and grok more; >and handle more execution paths or at least more logging events/cases and >possibly more configuration than your current INFO code. >From a product perspective: you'd have to test more scenarios in QA, train >your support staff on more conditions, and document more logging event cases. Current INFO use doesn't support this capability, so why do we need to add it? -hadriel _______________________________________________ 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
