Re: [Simple] 501 Not Implemented considered harmful in MSRP

[Hisham Khartabil <hisham.khartabil at telio.no>]

You can extend MSRP with new methods. We however do not negotiate 
supported MSRP methods in the offer/answer exchange when initiating the 
request. Therefore 501 is needed. I don't understand why 400 is better 
in this case.

The draft says

"A 501 response indicates that the recipient does not understand the
   request method."

Regards,
Hisham

On Feb 14, 2006, at 1:25 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

> I guess I could go either way on this - I probably need to think about 
> it
> more. More information about what went wrong is often better.
>
> On 2/4/06 7:32 AM, "Jussi K. Virtanen" <jussi.k.virtanen at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > MSRP defines the status code 501 Not Implemented to be sent as a
> > response to a request with unknown request method. I propose that
> > the status code is removed and the status code 400 Bad Request is
> > used instead.
>
> > The existence of 501 Not Implemented implies that it is acceptable
> > to introduce new capabilities (in this case, a new request method)
> > to a session outside an offer--answer exchange. As far as I can see,
> > this is in conflict with established conventions in SIP and SDP.
>
>
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Jussi K. Virtanen
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Simple mailing list
> > Simple at ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
>
> _______________________________________________
> Simple mailing list
> Simple at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple


_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple