I too am confused about what/whom you feel is wrong. Is it that you're unhappy that INVITE, ACK, PRACK, UPDATE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, PUBLISH, MESSAGE, REGISTER and INFO methods can have multiple body parts and there's no clear distinction of which body part applies to the method's context action/purpose?
ISTM somewhat silly to go and fix this for new uses of INFO. It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The ship was built to gracefully handle a few holes from usual wear-tear, and you want it to survive a whole iceberg (multiple bodies). It would be nice to make the boat stronger (ie, change all the RFCs to have body-part contexts), but that ship has already sailed. (oooh, a metaphoric double entendre) Imagine if we were talking about updating the HTTP POST method for some reason, and while we were doing it we realized some body-parts may not be for the POST context, but could instead be in any HTTP method - like a Geo-Loc body-part for example. Would we: (a) Change how POST is formatted, to uniquely identify the mime parts that *are* for POST operation, and only for POST, or (b) Make the body parts that were *not* part of the POST context uniquely identify themselves as *not* being part of it, no matter the method? Methinks (b). (b) is accomplished by having the body-part that is NOT for the INFO package identify itself using a Content-Disposition of "by-reference". -hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric > Burger > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 9:32 AM > > Wrong because there is no explicit linking of a body part to what that > body part belongs to. > > Content-Disposition is absolutely the wrong thing. The original > Content-Disposition is about whether you wait for the whole message to > arrive before rendering, and if you render the part where you find it > or as an attachment. SIP has bent this totally out of shape beyond > recognition, almost to the point where it really is Message-Context. > > Perhaps that is the answer? Do-as-I-say (Message-Context), not Do-as- > I-mean (Content-Disposition)? > _______________________________________________ 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
