Re: MSRP chat: 'chatroom' attribute ABNF
Ben Campbell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.simple |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
(as individual) On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:08 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote: […] > > So, one can derive that if a conference focus does not have support for nicknames nor for private messages, it should write an empty attribute: a=chatroom > > The standalone a=chatroom signals that the MSRP switch understand this draft, in particular the convention to use Message/CPIM wrappers for sending regular messages. > > So, I suggest to modify the ABNF to support a standalone attribute in the following way: > > attribute =/ chatroom-attr > chatroom-attr = chatroom-label [":" chat-token > *(SP chat-token)] > > This accommodates both standalone and non-standalone attributes, such as: > > a=chatroom > a=chatroom:private-messages > a=chatroom:nickname private-messages > > I also suggest to add a couple of paragraphs indicating that it is fine to include a standalone 'chatroom' attribute: > > An example of a 'chatroom' attribute for an MSRP media stream where > the endpoint, e..g, an MSRP switch, does not allow neither nicknames > nor private messages. > > a=chatroom > > The 'chatroom' attribute > without further modifiers (e.g., tokens) indicates that the endpoint > supports the procedures described in this document for transferring > MSRP messages to/from a multi-party conference. > > > Does anyone have concerns with the above proposal? I concur with the proposal. Thanks! Ben.