Subject: Re: [Sip] New HTTP Event Package Draft

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:22:14 -0500

Theo Zourzouvillys wrote:
> 2.2, para 3:
>
>    [...] If a server
>    wishes to reject such requests, the "403 Forbidden" response code is
>    appropriate.
>
> It would be good to provide a way of returning to the client which
> ones it was unhappy with in the response, to save it having to go off
> and perform a HEAD on each original resource to find out which one has
> changed.
>   

Good point. I've modified it to read:

   [...] If a server
   wishes to reject such requests, the "403" (Forbidden) response code
   is appropriate.  Any "403" responses generated for this reason SHOULD
   contain a body of type "application/resource-lists+xml"; this body
   lists the offending URI or URIs.  See RFC 4826 [6] for the definition
   of the "application/resource-lists+xml" MIME type.

> 2.2, para 5:
>
>   Finally, for each such group, it initiates a subscription to the
> group's monitor-list URI;
>
> do you mean "monitor-group" instead of "monitor-list"?
>   

Yep. Good catch.

/a