Between Minneapolis and now, this document has become a lot more confusing, which I think bodes pretty ill for its hopes of being deployed.

For example, in section 5:

  If the received initial request contains an 199 option tag, the UAS
  SHOULD NOT send a 199 response for a dialog on which it intends to
  send a final response...

This reads as if sending a 199 response somehow absolves a UAS of sending a final response. Certainly this is not the intention of the draft (at least, not according to the text in section 7). Section 5 needs to be re-phrased to indicate what is actually intended here.

In fact, on that topic, it's radically unclear to me how UASes fit into the entire scheme at all -- my understanding is that the 199 response is only sent by forking proxies. Given that a UAS is inherently an endpoint, the entirety of section 5 seems nonsensical. Either I'm missing something (in which case it needs some pretty explicit motivating text), or section 5 needs to be removed completely.

In section 6:

  When a forking proxy receives a non-2xx final response that it
  recognizes as terminating one or more early dialogs, if the proxy
  does not intend to forward the final response immediately (in
  accordance with rules for a forking proxy) and the UAC has indicated
  support for the 199 response code, the proxy SHOULD generate and send
  a 199 response upstream for each early dialog terminated on the
  downstream side by the non-2xx final response, except for any early
  dialog for which the proxy has previously received and forwarded a
  199 response.

What? On my best run at reading that, I made it to about the 81st word before the first predicate clause fell out of my head. If it's really as complicated as the structure of this sentence makes it seem, we need a flowchart or some other simplifying mechanism.


/a

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to