Subject: RE: [Sipping] KPML w/ HTTP?

From: "Eric Burger" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:11:14 -0500

It is an open issue because delivery over SIP has some benefits, such as end-to-end security, middle-box traversal, ease of proxy development, etc.

The reason it is open is you can hack your way through those issues with HTTP.  It's just a lot harder.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jain, Rajnish (Rajnish) [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:45 PM
> To: [email-masked]'
> Subject: [Sipping] KPML w/ HTTP?
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> The application interaction framework draft as well as the KPML draft 
> suggests use of KPML to:
> 
> - specify DTMF reporting rules (from SIP app to UA w/in SIP mime body)
> - specify DTMF reports (from UA to SIP app w/in HTTP POST) 
>   
> The draft also mentions that reporting of KPML w/in HTTP POST 
> is an "open 
> issue". Pls refer to the following snippet from the draft:
> 
> ...
> However, all of the markup languages discussed above use HTTP 
> form POST 
> requests as the primary interface [note that this is still an 
> open issue 
> with KPML] ...
> 
> Would someone pls shed some light on, why is this an open 
> issue rightnow? 
> 
> Also, would it seem reasonable that (as an alternative to 
> HTTP POST) a 
> SIP message (?) from UA to app carry KPML doc in-line? Else, 
> would it be
> practical to run HTTP on embedded platforms that host SIP 
> apps currently?
> 
> Thanks,
> R. Jain
> _______________________________________________
> Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
> This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
> Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
> Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP
> 
_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP