Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Dean Willis [mailto:dean.willis at softarmor.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 3:25 PM On Dec 9, 2008, at 12:54 PM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: I would say it as something like "If the UAS cannot decode the MIME structure of the body because of formatting errors, it returns a 606. If the UAS can decode the MIME structure of the body but does not know what to do with the body parts, either because they are of an unrecognized type or because there is no application to consume those body parts, the UAS returns a 415. Otherwise, the UAS delivers the body part to the application and returns a 200 OK." I would leave discussion of application-level rejection of body parts entirely out of the discussion.Sounds fine with me.
This seems to make it *incorrect* to return any error response in the case where the content of the body is incorrect. (For instance if the syntax of the body part is inconsistent with the Content-Type declared for that part.
While I am ok with *allowing* the UAS to return a 200 in this case, I think we go too far to say they UAS MUST NOT return an error for this situation.
OTOH, none of the above is normative language, so perhaps the whole thing is to be construed as a recommendation or note? I find it very difficult after the fact to interpret such language. I would rather that it be very explicit about what is normative and what is not intended to be.
Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ 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