[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
Of course that is why we are having these discussions.
- P-Called-Party-ID does not carry this information. As has been
explained. It might sometimes carry the same URI, but it has a different
meaning.
- History-Information does not carry this information. As has been
explained. It might somewhere carry the same URI, but if that is not
extractable as being the one we need, then what good is it. You may not
like it but that is how it is.
Otherwise WE would not have proposed a new header.
/Hans Erik
-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet at nortel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 6:53 PM
To: Hans Erik van Elburg; Juha Heinanen; Christer Holmberg
Cc: sip at ietf.org; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
Subject: RE: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
Again, the burden is on the proponent of the new header to prove that a
new header is needed when we apparently have headers that carries the
same information, and more.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans Erik van Elburg [mailto:hanserik.van.elburg at ericsson.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 02:43
> To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); Juha Heinanen; Christer Holmberg
> Cc: sip at ietf.org; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
> Subject: RE: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
>
> It is clearly not the same as History-Info header as has been
> explained in the draft and in several previous threads. It has also
> been explained why History-Info can not be used for this as is.
>
> A simple new header with a clear semantics which provides a clean
> solution to the problem is therefore not even challenged by the
> History-Info header. Instead you should argue why History-Info is so
> bloody good that we should use it for this. We just learned that it is
> not even usable as a diagnostic tool.
>
> Why carry a whole log of request URI rewrites around when you are only
> interested in the current target???
>
> /Hans Erik
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francois Audet [mailto:audet at nortel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 6:18 PM
> To: Hans Erik van Elburg; Juha Heinanen; Christer Holmberg
> Cc: sip at ietf.org; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
> Subject: RE: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
>
> Any addition of a new header that nobody can explain properly why it's
> not the same as History-Info IS rocket science.
>
> It sounds like we are getting paid by the number of URI we add to SIP.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hans Erik van Elburg [mailto:hanserik.van.elburg at ericsson.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 01:07
> > To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); Juha Heinanen; Christer Holmberg
> > Cc: sip at ietf.org; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
> > Subject: RE: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
> >
> > The point is that History-Info does not solve the problem
> so something
>
> > new is needed anyway.
> >
> > And proper use of History-Info is rocket science as Dale has shown.
> >
> > /Hans Erik
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of
> > Francois Audet
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:16 AM
> > To: Juha Heinanen; Christer Holmberg
> > Cc: sip at ietf.org; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
> > Subject: Re: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
> >
> > There are existing implementations of History-Info in the field.
> >
> > It's not rocket science.
> >
> > And I don't see why introducing something else will be simpler. It
> > will just be extra complexity.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of
> > > Juha Heinanen
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 05:48
> > > To: Christer Holmberg
> > > Cc: sip at ietf.org; DOLLY, MARTIN C, ATTLABS
> > > Subject: Re: [Sip] Comparison of retargeting proposals
> > >
> > > Christer Holmberg writes:
> > >
> > > > However, I still fail to understand how Target would be more
> > > "complex"
> > > > than e.g. History-Info.
> > >
> > > christer,
> > >
> > > ANY solution for anything must be MUCH simpler than history-info,
> > > which is far too complex by itself.
> > >
> > > i haven't seen anyone fully implement history-info and
> most likely
> > > that is because of its complexity. if you are now going
> to invent
> > > some other mechanism that is as complex or even more
> > complex, it has
> > > no change in real world.
> > >
> > > i therefore suggest that h-i is deprecated and a replaced
> > by a simpler
> >
> > > mechanism.
> > >
> > > -- juha
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sip mailing list https://www.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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip mailing list https://www.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
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.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