Subject: [Sip] draft-sparks-sip-invfix-01, relaying: MUST versus SHOULD

From: Jiri Kuthan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 19:52:31 +0100

while I agree that fixing premature dropping of transaction context
is the right way to go, I'm wondering if we are not overstandizing
with requiring a proxy server to drop replies without related transaction
context.

My esthetic preference is not to standardize this as a MUST and document the
well-known relaying risks (possibly in form of a SHOULD recommendation). 
It appears to me that there are valid cases (say failover in trusted-environment) 
where it can be more benefecial to complete transactions statelessly than 
protection against relaying. (which is not very strong anyhow).

-jiri

--
Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.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: Jiri Kuthan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:40:23 -0400

I'm just wondering if folks have an opinion on this. I mean if we leave it as
is, we can write off all of stateless servers, can't we.

-jiri