Re: [Sip] INFO: A recap, sense of consensus and a proposal for direction.

[Adam Roach <adam at nostrum.com>]

On 10/30/07 11:16 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
> Yeah I was thinking the same thing - if there are two ways someone will surely do one and not the other and we'll have problems.
> I was just thinking someone may come up with one that makes sense for both, in different usage contexts.  But I guess that's really 2 different package types that may just happen to share a defining RFC or have the same registered package name, but are really two separate "things".
> Regardless, I think it's safer to say for now the two package types are unrelated.
>   

Excellent.

/a


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