Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-resource-priority-02

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:31:23 EST

In a message dated 2/15/2004 5:57:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> This may be partially due to confusion in versioning; since the last 
> IETF, there were no more 'default' values. (Indeed, the word does not 
> appear in the document.) [Mike Pierce]
> 

I don't know what the confusion is. Looking at the -01 version contained on 
the IETF-58 CD I just received, there is the following statement in Section 12:

"The registration MUST indicate the default level to be assumed in the 
absence of the priority value ..."

Was there another unumbered update that I missed?

Mike

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:41:20 -0500

> I don't know what the confusion is. Looking at the -01 version contained 
> on the IETF-58 CD I just received, there is the following statement in 
> Section 12:
> 

There was an early -02 that I only announced to the mailing list, but 
never got around to submitting. In any event, the notion of defaults is 
gone since it makes no sense in the current setup.

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.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