Re: Comments on RFC2806bis

> The name change would cause grief for 
> BroadSoft because we have products deployed 
> within networks which send, receive, and
> use phone-context.  An attempt to rename 
> or introduce a short-form of the parameter 
> would complicate interoperability.

Sounds like a definitive answer. It stays "phone-context".


> 
> Also rfc2806 allowed a much greater 
> non-escaped character-set for the 
> phone-context value.  Reducing this 
> character-set within rfc2806bis will
> potentially also cause some grief.

The previous definition was not interoperable, so I'm not inclined to 
change this. This is not a character-set issue but defining in a 
meaningful way what phone-context means and minimizing the damage caused 
by local phone URIs that escape their intended scope. I believe there 
was group consensus on that, but as usual in the IETF, this is subject 
to re-discussion at any point :-)