Re: [Sip] Draft: draft-holmberg-sip-keep-00.txt

["Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg at ericsson.com>]

>>>Since there seems to be different opinions on whether CRLF has already been implemented by everyone
>
>>i don't think that anyone has claimed that CRLF has been implemented by EVERYONE.  it has been implemented by SOME UAs without keep param and the number if growing.
>
>And there's the rub.  The set of UA's which will send CRLF vs. not, and the set of Proxies which will handle it as a keepalive rather than nothingness, is a Venn diagram.  We have mechanisms in SIP to solve that and find out which portion of the diagram each party is in.  For some reason you don't want >such mechanisms to be used.
>
>
>>>whether an indication is needed etc, what is wrong with what you proposed earlier, that the draft would not explicitly forbid sending CRLF even if keep=yes is not returned?
>
>>it should explicitly RECOMMEND it.
>
>No, it really shouldn't, imo.  It should say nothing about it.  If you support the draft, then use the keep.  If you don't support the draft, all bets are off and your mileage will vary on what will happen.  It's just local policy at that point, and you could guess wrong.

I agree with Hadriel. It is very difficult to, in a spec, say what an entity not supporting the spec should do - because implementors may not even have read the spec. But, again, we can choose to not explicitly forbid sending CRLF, which means that people not supporting "keep" can continue sending CRLF without anyone being able to tell them that what they are doing goes against some spec etc.

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
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