Re: Sip-199-02: majors and nits from Robert
Hadriel Kaplan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC313747B6418@mail> |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:24 PM > > > >If we can't think of any legitimate use for an option-tag in Require, > why should we allow it? > > Because there may be a legitimate use for it tomorrow, or next week, or > next year. It occurs to me maybe we're talking past each other. When I think of the *Require* header, I think of what does any random endpoint/gateway getting this request have to support for this to succeed. I can see no value in having that behavior, and plenty of harm in doing so. I don't want a UAC maker to ever think it can require UAS' to implement 199 in order for its request to succeed. But maybe what you're talking about is *Proxy-Require*? -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