Re: draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages per INFO

A possible reason to want multiple packages per INFO request, is that it 
allows one to construct applications that rely on "all or nothing" 
semantics for correlated events.

For example, if one would use SIP to implement an application that lets 
one post a small icon on a blog, and requires an authorization token to 
do that, both would have to arrive together. Another example could be an 
electronic variant of a postage stamp (i.e. some token representing some 
monetary value), when using two different INFOs one might fail to arrive 
where the other would (i.e. content without payment, or payment without 
content).

It has to do with certain atomic, transactional behavior and consistency 
of the user experience

Regards,
Jeroen

Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> I also agree it is too extreme to restrict to one package per dialog.
> But as I stated earlier, I'm fine not defining multiple packages per 
> INFO.
>
>     Paul
>
> Christer Holmberg wrote:
>> Hi,
>>> I don't have a problem agreeing with that.
>>>
>>> Note that buried somewhere in this thread was a question of whether we
>> had a use case for multiple packages per dialog, or can we simplify even
>> further.
>>
>> I don't think we should go that far, because that could become very
>> restrictive.
>>
>> For example, assume I want to use INFO packages e.g. for DTMF during the
>> call setup, and then other INFO package(s) for something else during the
>> call.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Christer
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 10:51 AM
>>> To: Elwell, John; Dean Willis; DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>>> Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger; Paul Kyzivat
>>> Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages 
>>> per INFO
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I agree with John. Let's keep it simple. If allowing multiple packages
>>
>>> in a single INFO causes issues, let's forget about it.
>>>
>>> The whole idea with this is to allow people using INFO to do so in 
>>> an easy and standardized way, so let's not shoot ourselves in the 
>>> foot with complexity.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Christer
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Elwell, John [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: 23. lokakuuta 2008 12:30
>>> To: Christer Holmberg; Dean Willis; DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>>> Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger; Paul Kyzivat
>>> Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages 
>>> per INFO
>>>
>>> In reply to this whole thread, please bear in mind that we had lots of
>>
>>> discussion about whether it would be worthwhile defining this new INFO
>>
>>> mechanism, since existing applications are unlikely to change and 
>>> the best we can hope for is that new applications will exploit the 
>>> new mechanism. Therefore we want to keep the mechanism as simple as 
>>> possible. The complexities of matching body parts to header fields, 
>>> dealing with cases where only some of the packages are understood, etc.
>>> are hardly likely to persuade people to implement the mechanism. 
>>> Please keep it simple.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>> Behalf Of
>>>> Christer Holmberg
>>>> Sent: 23 October 2008 08:17
>>>> To: Dean Willis; DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>>>> Cc: SIP IETF; Eric Burger; Paul Kyzivat
>>>> Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-info-events-00: multiple packages 
>>>> per INFO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>>> Why does putting two different packages in the same INFO
>>>> work better
>>>>>> than two different INFO messages each with their own
>>>> package usage? Is
>>>>
>>>>>> there a desirable relationship that can be implemented
>>>> between the two
>>>>
>>>>>> that we would otherwise lose?
>>>>> We have one package per NOTIFY. Let's stick with one package
>>>> per INFO,
>>>> unless we want to go back to using mime-types as the only 
>>>> distinguisher of packages.
>>>>
>>>> I raised that issue in another e-mail.
>>>>
>>>> But, never the less, I have no strong feelings on the single versus 
>>>> multiple package issue.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Christer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
>>>> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use 
>>>> [email protected] for questions on current sip Use 
>>>> [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
>>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
> Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
>
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip