Subject: Re: MESSAGE size limitations (Was: RE: [Sip] Message draft changes)

From: "Ashhar Farhan" <[email-masked]>
Date: 18 May 2002 10:03:20 -0000

On Sat, 18 May 2002 Henning Schulzrinne wrote :
>Plus, even if we do (1), this does not preclude (3) and maybe 
>even (2) in the future, should there be a demonstrated need.
>

if you have been following the noises from GSM world, multimedia 
messaging is turing out to be a big opportunity (personally, i 
dont agree), but if you consider that MESSAGE may, at a future 
date, also contain very large content, then is it not possible 
that the actual content be a hyperlink in the MESSAGE body?

there are some real problems with using MESSAGE for anything but 
short text messages:

1) it is the charter of SIP that it will use other standardised 
protocols where required rather than provide an alternative. If we 
already have ftp, http and a few more available, then why invent 
yet another one?

2)MESSAGE's main feature is that it is session less so it provides 
a rapid means of messagine without creating any session. this is 
not going to be of any particular advantage when u are going to 
transfer more than a few kilbytes in anycase. In such cases, you 
are better off with other protocols. using MESSAGE as a carrier of 
the URL.

- farhan

_________________________________________________________
Click below to visit monsterindia.com and review jobs in India or 
Abroad
http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 09:53:40 -0500

Hi Farhan,

What you describe is exactly what we mean by content-indirection. The actual
payload is merely a URL that refers to external content. This is a lot like
the external body part feature already available in MIME. We have work in
progress to refine that idea.

>From the rest of your email, I assume you concur with my option 1?

Thanks!

Ben.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ashhar Farhan [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 5:03 AM
> To: Henning Schulzrinne
> Cc: Michael Thomas; Dean Willis; 'Jonathan Rosenberg'; 'Sean Olson';
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; Ben Campbell
> Subject: Re: MESSAGE size limitations (Was: RE: [Sip] Message draft
> changes)
>
>
>
>