[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Sip] INFO and what to do about it?
Personally, I'd like to see some coherent discussion around it in a WG
meeting then try to get to consensus on it. The totally number of
people bothering to follow the conversation at this point is extremely
low.
On Jun 18, 2008, at 10:08 PM, Dean Willis wrote:
I asked:
> We've been batting INFO around for many, From sip-bounces at ietf.org Sat Jun 21 09:28:51 2008
Return-Path: <sip-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sip-archive at optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sip-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFB0B3A6961;
Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: sip at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2D0D3A6986
for <sip at core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:28:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.08
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.08 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_24_48=1.219,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id uixV24ChThkJ for <sip at core3.amsl.com>;
Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3.cisco.com [171.71.176.72])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A83853A69A1
for <sip at ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,684,1204531200"; d="scan'208";a="82367854"
Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21])
by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Jun 2008 09:28:26 -0700
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238])
by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m5LGSQrc031845;
Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:28:26 -0700
Received: from [192.168.4.2] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82])
by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m5LGSH5i008146;
Sat, 21 Jun 2008 16:28:26 GMT
Message-Id: <BEE5E46D-0056-40FA-99E9-19B6808C0F5A at cisco.com>
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy at cisco.com>
To: Dean Willis <dean.willis at softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <3FC39F18-6598-4EF1-A7B8-808E8BD7951D at softarmor.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:49:00 -0600
References: <6BFBFA7D-F646-4647-A084-DF383B6A8371 at softarmor.com>
<F66D7286825402429571678A16C2F5EE03FDC938 at zrc2hxm1.corp.nortel.com>
<3FC39F18-6598-4EF1-A7B8-808E8BD7951D at softarmor.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1462; t=1214065706;
x=1214929706; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004;
h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;
d=cisco.com; i=fluffy at cisco.com;
z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20<fluffy at cisco.com>
|Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Sip]=20INFO=20and=20what=20to=20do=20a
bout=20it? |Sender:=20;
bh=DGAfW7zP3KBBIB/45woZZLmiizXlDQtsG1m1KfNbmDU=;
b=g/UcdOGImc63Can6gEka088INnf5gRVAygX29aRI4XrrxJDnvicolc147S
R0mJwS2VebltIXxwrBiobsuigamrjvOynTVosVe9xKKLSnw8fCyGnDQsUiBe
Q06XyM7/L+xqx5VK5Xud2+/F6jdWrTBs56JTmQHGYfS1RK3ckBjB8=;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=fluffy at cisco.com; dkim=pass (
sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; );
Cc: sip at ietf.org, Jon Peterson <jon.peterson at neustar.biz>
Subject: Re: [Sip] INFO and what to do about it?
X-BeenThere: sip at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
<mailto:sip-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/sip>
List-Post: <mailto:sip at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
<mailto:sip-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: sip-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces at ietf.org
Personally, I'd like to see some coherent discussion around it in a WG
meeting then try to get to consensus on it. The totally number of
people bothering to follow the conversation at this point is extremely
low.
On Jun 18, 2008, at 10:08 PM, Dean Willis wrote:
I asked:
> We've been batting INFO around for many, many yeamany years now (like, 10 --
> it predates the SIP working group). A couple of meetings back, we
> agreed that we would discuss use cases for INFO packages, and if we
> didn't find any consensus there, then we would go ahead and
publish an
> "INFO Considered Harmful" RFC.
>
> We tried having this discussion at the last IETF, but that just
didn't
> work out.
>
> Do we try again, or just give up and publish "INFO Considered
> Harmful"?
>
> Personally, I don't care anymore -- I just want to drive a stake
into
> the heart of this undead-thing, cut off its head, stuff the mouth
with
> holy wafers, and bury it at a crossroads somewhere.
>
> But this WG only slays by consensus, so what do you want?
Several people (Jonathan, Mary, Christer, Paul) have responded to the
list with various things that added up to "Publish INFO packages AND
document the extension models for SIP". So far, nobody has suggested
otherwise.
Does anybody want to do anything else? Speak now or forever visualize
whirled peas.
--
Dean
_______________________________________________
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
rs now (like, 10 --
> it predates the SIP working group). A couple of meetings back, we
> agreed that we would discuss use cases for INFO packages, and if we
> didn't find any consensus there, then we would go ahead and
publish an
> "INFO Considered Harmful" RFC.
>
> We tried having this discussion at the last IETF, but that just
didn't
> work out.
>
> Do we try again, or just give up and publish "INFO Considered
> Harmful"?
>
> Personally, I don't care anymore -- I just want to drive a stake
into
> the heart of this undead-thing, cut off its head, stuff the mouth
with
> holy wafers, and bury it at a crossroads somewhere.
>
> But this WG only slays by consensus, so what do you want?
Several people (Jonathan, Mary, Christer, Paul) have responded to the
list with various things that added up to "Publish INFO packages AND
document the extension models for SIP". So far, nobody has suggested
otherwise.
Does anybody want to do anything else? Speak now or forever visualize
whirled peas.
--
Dean
_______________________________________________
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