Subject: RE: [Sip] WGLC for URI and Header Parameter Registries

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:07:43 +0300

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Dean Willis [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 7:04 PM
> To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP-MSW/Helsinki)
> Cc: [email-masked]; Niemi Aki (NMP/Helsinki);
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [Sip] WGLC for URI and Header Parameter Registries
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 08:46, [email-masked] wrote:
> > I thought the whole point of these drafts was to require 
> everyone to register at IANA. What is the point if I still 
> don't have to register? If no registering is mandated, then 
> there will be clashes.
> 
> The point was that the REALLY important parameter names, the ones that
> NEED to interoperate and not clash, get registered.  And since they're
> important enough to register, we want to know what they mean and how
> they work, so a specification is required.
> 
> We had consensus that these important parameters needed to be in a
> registry.
> 
> We did NOT have consensus that every parameter that might ever be used
> for a one-off application needed to be registered.

What does "one-off application" mean?

/Hisham

> 
> 
> So, what we're doing is defining a registry with a tight admissions
> policy so we can get critical stufff "on the books", and we have the
> option of relaxing that policy, if needed, at some future time, should
> we ever have a consensus to do so.
> 
> --
> Dean
> 

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:35:06 -0500

On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 02:07, [email-masked] wrote:
> Dean sai:

"One-off" is a colloquialism for a thing used one time and then
discarded or obsoleted.

An example here might be a college student who is working on an
application using SIP to invite his friends to play a game that he just
wrote as a class project. The invitation carries a new parameter he made
up, "Game=X78hj9p" that the SIP proxy uses to route players to the right
game session.

Since he hasn't written the RFC to register the parameter "Game" and
define exactly what the value "X78hj9p" means, we'd have to send out the
protocol police to arrest him for violating the specification. Or even
worse, perhaps his professor would force him to write the RFC, and then
"Game" could ONLY be used as he had previously specified it, and every
other college student from then on out with have to come up with
something else to call their new parameter. In short, something that has
no reason to be "standardized" would suddenly become an IANA registered
reality . . . (this is especially aggravating on an open-registration
first-come-first-served registery).

Or we go with plan B -- since "Game" isn't a registered parameter, he
can use it however he wants, and if it breaks something (like the
different use of "Game" in his roommate's class project), that's his
problem. Or his roomates. But if he tries to reuse "lr", which we DID
register (and define in an RFC), his professor can slap him around and
point out the documentation for what he did wrong.

--
Dean