Subject: RE: RECURRENCE-ID discussion

From: Satya Vempati <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 19:05:58 -0700

<<Yes - its in iCal where SEQUENCE is defined.>>

I can't find a clear sentence that says so. Could you cut and paste the
relevant sentence from 2445?

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Royer [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 6:06 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: RECURRENCE-ID discussion

Satya Vempati wrote:
> On a related note, is there a part of the RFC that states that the
> SEQUENCE number should always be incremented by 1?

Yes - its in iCal where SEQUENCE is defined.

> The RFC's talk of
> incrementing, but as far as I can tell, the increments can vary.

What an attendee sees can vary if they are or are not part
of versions of the object. If an ATTENDEE sees an update
to an instance and it is more than one behind the current
SEQUENCE number that ATTENDEE-CUA is going to have to do
a REFRESH in order to get the latest object in order to
apply the update.

The only exception is when the Bruces new model is used to invite
you to a single instance and when it is the first object you get
with that UID, then the ATTENDEE has to always do an REFRESH because they
broke the uniqueness of single instance updates and called it a
new invitation.

-- 

  Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
  -------------------------------|-----------------------------
  [email-masked]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
  http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                 |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                 We Do Standards - You Need Standards

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:34:24 -0600

> relevant sentence from 2445?

It was quoted by someone else on the list, look for mono <something>

--