On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 14:54 -0500, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Scott Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 2:33 PM > > > > I don't think that reformulating call-id is any harder to deploy than a > > new header would be. > > You missed an email explaining that: if we mandate not changing "safe" > call-id values, all b2bua's along the path have to stop changing it, > and the UAC has to create a "safe" one. If we do a new header, only > some b2bua's need to change for matching to work in most cases. All > of them would need to pass the header for it to work, but my > assumption is that's more likely. It may be a false assumption, but > from the traces I get to see, it looks like new headers get through > fairly often. (at least those without URI's)
I'll take your word for that. I'm still troubled by what I perceive as an inversion of the names: I think of a 'session' as something that happens within a 'call'. I believe that you're looking for something that's a parent of 'call-id's, not a child. Might I suggest 'Call-Set-Id'? _______________________________________________ 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
