Subject: [Sip] INFO Stunning Silence

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:24:08 -0500

I know, we are just back from vacation.  However, for a document that  
generated over 300 e-mails, I'm surprised there isn't another flood.

Check out:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sip-info-events-02

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.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: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 08:34:11 -0500

Eric,

I just haven't had time to look at it. I knew I had better wait till I 
really had time to go over it. Between actually taking some time off, 
and doing *some* of my own ietf homework, and being behind in my day 
job, I just don't have such a block of time right now.

But I promise I will comment!

	Thanks,
	Paul

Eric Burger wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

---

From: "Christer Holmberg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:44:50 +0100

Hi,

Some comments:

1. Would it be good to add some words to section 2, saying that "For
backward compabiltiy, this document does not forbid legacy usage of INFO
with no info-package, as described in section 6.", or something like
that...

2. Section 4.1 says:

The text:

"The initiating UA of the first INVITE MUST be prepared to receive
multiple INFO requests, as the first INVITE may fork."

...should be modified with something like:

"The initiation UA of the first INVITE MUST be prepared to receive INFO
requests from multiple remote destinations, as the INVITE may fork."

3. In section 4.1, would it be good to add some explicit words about the
fact that it is allowed for the UAS to send INFO during the early
dialog?

RFC3311 says the following for UPDATE:

"The UPDATE request is constructed as would any other request within an
existing dialog, as described in Section 12.2.1 of RFC 3261.  It MAY be
sent for both early and confirmed dialogs, and MAY be sent by either
caller or callee."

...so I think we could say something similar for INFO.

Regards,

Christer

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
> Behalf Of Eric Burger
> Sent: 6. tammikuuta 2009 14:24
> To: IETF SIP List
> Subject: [Sip] INFO Stunning Silence
> 
> I know, we are just back from vacation.  However, for a 
> document that generated over 300 e-mails, I'm surprised there 
> isn't another flood.
> 
> Check out: