Re: Draft ietf-sip-xcapevent revised, many open questions

On May 26, 2009, at 7:35 PM, Dean Willis wrote:
>
>
> 3) SUBSCRIBE bodies
>
> Section 4.4 currently says;
>
>   The SUBSCRIBE request MAY contain an Accept header field.  If no  
> such
>   header field is present, it has a default value of "application/
>   xcap-diff+xml".  If the header field is present, it MUST include
>   "application/xcap-diff+xml", and MAY include any other types.
>
> This doesn't sound right to me.
>

	Yeah, this is what 3265 makes us do (define a default Accept header  
field value for the event package).

	Also, it looks like we lost a right-angle-bracket on the <element>  
open tag in the xcap-diff document in section 5.

	Lastly, I have been meaning to ask; in what cases (if any) would  
sending a SUBSCRIBE 404 be appropriate in this event package? Do we  
establish a subscription even if every uri in the SUBSCRIBE body  
refers to an AUID we don't support? What about uris that are formatted  
in an unsupported way (for example, using "users/bob" when what the  
server really needs is "users/sip:bob@foo"), or that use a document  
name that doesn't exist in the AUID being used (say, "rls- 
services.xml" instead of "index" or "index.xml")? How about uris that  
are outright malformed; it seems that our best choice is a SUBSCRIBE  
400, but what if only one of the uris in the SUBSCRIBE body is in such  
a state? Could we use <xcap-error> documents in some way (provided the  
subscriber supports this format) to help indicate what went wrong in  
these cases?

Best regards,
Byron Campen

_______________________________________________
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