Subject: Re: [Sip] sip-199-02: should it really be *199*?

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:22:34 -0500

Normally when we define new response codes, don't we just let IANA 
assign the next one when the document is finalized? Is this one really 
so special that it *needs* the last provisional code? Any reason this 
shouldn't be 18x? (x=4 unless thats been taken by something in the pipe. 
183 is the last one IANA shows.)

	Thanks,
	Paul
_______________________________________________
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: "Christer Holmberg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:16:09 +0100

Hi, 

assign the next one when the document is finalized? Is this one really
so special that it *needs* the last provisional code? Any reason
>this shouldn't be 18x? (x=4 unless thats been taken by something in the
pipe. 183 is the last one IANA shows.)

Due to the nature of the response code, I think it IS special. So,
therefor I think we should go for 199 (or, maybe 101, if that for some
reason is better).

Regards,

Christer