Re: Call For Consensus on INFO Tags

Hi, 

>I let the dialog run for some 57 messages, hoping to see some
convergence.
>
>What I am hearing is the vast majority of people feel that the presence
of a Recv-Info in an INVITE, 200 OK, or OPTIONS is sufficient to signal
the UA supports the new Info Framework.  There are a few 
>hold-outs - speak now with strong use cases for a generic Option Tag or
hold your piece.
>
>I am also hearing that it would be useful to give guidance to Info
Package authors for when they may wish to define a Require tag for their
package, a'la MSCML.  Again, this would be guidance, not a 
>normative structure, as Option Tags already have a pretty nice
definition.
>
>Am I missing anything else?

I guess there should also be some guidance text for defining feature
tags, in case one wish to be able to use them in order to reach
terminals which supports specific info packages.

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