Re: Sip-199-02: majors and nits from Robert (was: RE: WGLC for draft-ietf-sip-199-02)
Hadriel Kaplan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC313747B6403@mail> |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:51 PM > > So, soon people will have to start deploying SBCs, in order to fix the > mistakes made by their existing SBCs..... ;) Well people do upgrade. I think they usually find it easier to upgrade their SBCs than upgrade their customers' PBX's or peer's equipment, or even their own core servers. > But, I think the correct way to prevent those is to make sure our specs > are clear enough, and easy to understand - not to start making > restrictions which may shoot back later. The thing is with the 199-type of mechanism I actually don't think we should ever allow such a thing to be Required, ever. What you are basically asking for is to create a new 1xx response code some device may require in order to operate correctly, and that I think is a bad idea. -hadriel _______________________________________________ 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