RE: [Sip] Record-Route, Path, Service Route, and Multi-Homed Proxies

["Dean Willis" <dwillis@dynamicsoft.com>]

> > Well, the Service-Route specification is a "new" I-D.
> Actually, it's
> > completed WGLC and is awaiting final IESG review. Miguel
> and Gonzalo
> > raised some valid concerns that it is not as useful as they
> want. They
> > want to use it in conjunction with Path (currently in the rfc-ed 
> > queue). Path refers to Record-Route behavior. So the
> proposed behavior
> > would probably need to be described in the Service-Route draft in 
> > order to keep Service-Route from being blocked on 3261bis.
> 
> I was afraid you would say so.  Although, for whatever it is worth, I 
> really wish we would do it in rfc3261bis, but if we cannot, so be it. 
> Maybe, when the time comes, we can replicate whatever is in the 
> Service-Route draft on multi-homed proxies in rfc3261bis -- just to 
> keep information in one place.

Absolutely -- I would suggest we document this in 3261bis, but since we
need Service-Route before then, we also document it minimally in
Service-Route. If the writeup in Service-Route doesn't match with what
eventually happens in bis, then we'll need to update Service-Route at
that time.

--
Dean

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip