Re: INFO Framework - one pakage per INFO
Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I'm ok with this, and I thought it had already been settled. Why are we rehashing it? Paul Dean Willis wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: > >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 7:16 AM >>> >>> We do allow multipart for legacy INFO (well, at least we don't disallow >>> it). >>> >>> Do we need to say anything about the number of packages? >> >> I'm not sure I understand the question. We should say: 1 INFO, 1 >> package. You make it sound like a package is a body-part. It's not. >> A package just defines a specific message use context, and rules >> thereof. You can define a info-package that specifies no bodies, for >> example. >> >> Adding support for multiple packages, is like asking for a message to >> have multiple usage contexts and rules. It makes my head hurt. :) >> > > I concur strongly with this position. > > I started thinking about the which-application-do-I-give-this-message-to > API, and realized that for some API models, multiple packages per INFO > would be a major furball. Let's just not go there. > > -- > Dean > _______________________________________________ > 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