I don't think it should cause so much concern as I think it just requires clarifying text and we just need to agree to more precise terms: e.g., qualifying the use of "forward" with either "next hop forwarding" or "request forwarding" for this particular case. As long as we can be precise in 4244bis, then that should suffice for now, but whenever 3261 is updated or bised, then I think the clarifications should be included.
Mary. -----Original Message----- From: Dean Willis [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 1:38 AM To: Shida Schubert Cc: [email protected] List; Barnes, Mary (RICH2:AR00) Subject: Re: [Sip] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-rosenberg-sip-target-uri-delivery-01.txt On Mar 11, 2009, at 1:13 AM, Shida Schubert wrote: > > One reason this is so difficult relates to the problem statement > in target-uri in that > RFC 3261 doesn't differentiate the mechanism by which the new > (target) Request-URI is selected. Another issue is that some of > the terminology in > RFC 3261 is overloaded - e.g., "forwarding" refers both to a > Proxy > which does not have responsibility for the domain of the > request-URI > in the incoming request, thus the proxy just "forwards" the > request to > the next hop AND "forwarding" is used to describe the process > whereby > the outgoing request is built and "forwarded" to the next hop at > which > point the proxy does not know how the new request-uri was > selected. > RFC 4244 has attempted to clarify the terms and attempts to use > "forward" > in the context of the former situation and "retarget" for the > case whereby > a proxy is responsible for the domain and thus can use a number > of > mechanism to select the new target for the request - e.g., a > REGISTRAR, > configured data, etc. > Thanks, Shida. I personally would not be averse to an Essential Correction that corrects the terminology in RFC 3261, but I suspect that will make many heads spin around elsewhere in the WG. -- 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
