Subject: RE: [Sipping] DTMF: Why Not A New Method?

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:30:51 -0500

Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:[email-masked]] writes:

> Also note that this is NOT an implicit subscription.
> It is quite explicit. Its just not done with SUBSCRIBE.

You can't define the problem away by twisting commonly accepted
terms in random directions. "Implicit Subscription" is the term
that we, as a community, have historically used to mean "a
subscription created by any means other than a SIP subscribe
request, as described in RFC 3265." It's just shorter to say
"implicit subscription."

/a

_______________________________________________
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

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:38:18 -0400

> request, as described in RFC 3265." It's just shorter to say

My point was that the problem with "implicit" was that a lot of the 
information in a normal subscribe was not present, and a lot of the 
things you can do with a normal subscribe (like refresh) were not 
possible. Many of those problems go away when we have a mechanism like 
the app-info header and kpml, where we can get similar functionality.

I'd welcome your thoughts on my responses to the specific issues you 
raised.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com