Re: Chat: questions on 'accept-wrapped-types'

On Sep 12, 2012, at 9:01 AM, "Miguel A. Garcia" <[email protected]> wrote:

[...]

>> 
>> At this point in time, I believe we don't really understand all the use
>> cases and problems that we will get when we introduce the
>> Content-Disposition handling parameter. Let me give you one example of
>> added complexity:
>> 
>> Alice sends a message to the chat room. The MSRP switch distribute to Bob
>> and Charlie, because both indicated an accept-wrapped-types of "*". Bob
>> accepts the content, but not Charlie. Charlie "MUST take the appropriate
>> failure action " [RFC3459], but which one is it? And then, when the MSRP
>> switch receives such 'failure action', what should it do towards the
>> sender? And should it wait to aggregate 'failure actions' from several
>> potential receivers?
>> 
>> So, let's be pragmatical. We don't have time nor requirements to have
>> this sophisticated feature at this late point in time. I will try to
>> think of something simple (e.g., discard on error). If someone is
>> interested, he or she should collect requirements and write an extension.
>> 
>> Is this reasonable? If so, I will come up with text for review?
> 
> This is the text I propose to add. Please comment.
> 
> 	  When generating a copy of the SEND request to each
> 	  participant in the chat room, the MSRP switch MUST evaluate
> 	  the wrapped media types that the recipient is able to
> 	  accept. This was learned through the 'accept-wrapped-types'
> 	  attribute of the MSRP message media line in SDP. If the
> 	  current. If the MSRP switch is aware that the media type of
> 	  the wrapped content is not acceptable to the recipient, the
> 	  MSRP switch SHOULD NOT forward this message to that
> 	  endpoint. Note that this version of the specification does
> 	  not require the MSRP switch to notify the sender about this
> 	  failure. Extensions to this specification may improve
> 	  handling of unknown media types.

WFM. I thought about explicitly mentioning the "*" case, where the switch may not learn a format is unacceptable until it tries to send it. But on reflection, I think that's covered implicitly. For this purpose, the "*" case means everything is acceptable.

> 
> 
>> 
>> /Miguel
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Miguel A. Garcia
> +34-91-339-3608
> Ericsson Spain
> _______________________________________________
> Simple mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple