Re: INFO Framework - one pakage per INFO

Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Anders Kristensen [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 9:44 PM
>>
>> In any event (no pun intended) I don't think the draft adequately deals
>> with the implications of this model. If errors occurring at higher
>> layers aren't reported as failure of the INFO request itself, it pretty
>> much follows that the 200 response to the INFO must include a payload
>> that carries info (sorry, pun not intended here either) on the error.
> 
> No I think the logic that Eric's arguing for is "you asked for delivery of this package, and I'm responding with 200 ok because it was delivered".  In other words treat INFO as a delivery vehicle, like MESSAGE, and as long as the package was delivered you send a 200 ok, with no correlation to if/when the package was opened and read successfully or not by a higher-layer info-package "consumer".
> 
> 
>> The alternatives would be:
>> 1) Don't report app-level errors. Perhaps OK for simple packages.
>> 2) Report outcome in separate INFO requests going in the opposite
>> direction. Seems wasteful and requires additional app-level correlation.
> 
> Yeah, I think Eric's argument is for (2).  If they need it, they pay for it.

Well, in the case of (2) I'd say they'd be overpaying. In my view it's a 
non-starter. People will want to be able to send app-level responses and 
they won't want to go through a lot of extra trouble to do it. And why 
should they? I'm thinking we should allow app-level errors to be 
signalled with INFO error codes and/or allow INFO responses to carry 
responses along the lines of what CSTA does.

I'll be applying the flame retardant now...

Anders
_______________________________________________
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