Re: Clarification on RFC 4458: SIP URIs for Applications such as Voicemail and Interactive Voice Response (IVR)

OK, I assumed the question arose because of usage of RFC4458 cause value 
mapping as indicated in my previous mail. My assumption might be wrong.

Going over RFC4458 again, it does not specify what proxies complying to 
this RFC  should do. Therefore claiming compliance might be pretty 
meaningless.

But if you look at the descriptive text and the examples it seems to 
indicate that both parameters will be added .

/Hans Erik

DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> And which part of the wording in RFC 4458 do you use to justify that?
>  
> The whole point of the question is that we are trying to ascertain 
> what is a legitimate conformance with RFC 4458.
>  
> regards
>  
> Keith
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>     Behalf Of *Hans Erik van Elburg
>     *Sent:* Friday, April 10, 2009 9:06 AM
>     *To:* DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>     *Cc:* [email protected]; Cullen Jennings; Francois Audet; Elwell, John
>     *Subject:* Re: [Sip] Clarification on RFC 4458: SIP URIs for
>     Applications such as Voicemail and Interactive Voice Response (IVR)
>
>     Specifications that only include the cause value mappings as
>     specified in RFC4458 reuse only that part of RFC4458.
>
>     Such reuse is of course fine, but carefull wording is required not
>     to imply full conformance with RFC4458 as that would lead to the
>     wrong implications/expectations.
>
>     /Hans Erik van Elburg
>
>
>     On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 6:06 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>         RFC 4458 defines two SIP URI parameters.
>
>         I can find no specific language in the document that indicates
>         whether these two URI parameters can be used independently of
>         each other, or whether there is an expectation that both URI
>         parameters should only exist in the presence of each other.
>         Specifically does an implementation that only includes the
>         "cause" SIP URI parameter and not the "target" sip URI
>         parameter conform to this specification?
>
>         All the text and examples seem to carry the implication that
>         where one exists, the other one will also.
>
>         Could one of the authors or some other interested party
>         clarify what they believe the intention is?
>
>         regards
>
>         Keith
>         _______________________________________________
>         Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
>         This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
>         Use [email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]> for questions on
>         current sip
>         Use [email protected] <mailto:[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