Re: INFO Framework - one pakage per INFO

Hi,

I agree with Paul: it's about documenting stuff in a way so that not only we understand it (eventhough there are RFCs which I am not sure even people on the list fully understands :), but also that others understand it. 

I also think that history also shows that having too much restrictive design can cause problems later.

Regards,

Christer

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 2:15 AM
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO Framework - one pakage per INFO

I think it defining valid syntax without carefully defining the corresponding semantics that is the problem. As long as we define both I don't see it as a problem.

	Thanks,
	Paul

Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> El Viernes, 28 de Noviembre de 2008, Christer Holmberg escribió:
>> If there is no technical reason I don't see why we again shall make a 
>> restriction which we later may "suffer" from.
> 
> I think the whole SIP protocol is a good example of how a too much 
> permissive design creates more interop issues than a more restricted design.
> 
_______________________________________________
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