> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Vijay K. Gurbani
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:02 AM
> To: Dean Willis
> Cc: SIP WG; Christer Holmberg
> Subject: Re: [Sip] New version (-05) of the 199 draft - ready for WGLC?
>
> Dean Willis wrote:
> > We didn't get any real answers due to a bit of confusion between this
> > and keepalive. So, let's ask the question again.
> >
> > Is 199 ready for WGLC?
>
> Yes; it is well written (I had looked at a much earlier version
> and just re-read -06.)
>
> One question for Christer:
>
> - Does 199 carry a message/sipfrag MIME type that conveys the
> nature of the final non-2xx response? This may have been
> discussed in the past, and if so, please let me know. I
> do note that rfc3420 is specified in the draft as a normative
> reference, but it is not referred to anywhere in the body
> of the draft.
There was discussion around 199 carrying information about why the fork/dialog
was terminated and sipfrag was mentioned to be used to convey that. However,
later on Reason header within 199 is agreed to be used for that purpose. Hence,
mention of 3420 might be obsolete by now.
Thanks,
Serhad
>
> Thanks,
>
> - vijay
> --
> Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
> 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
> Email: v...@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
> Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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
