Subject: Re: [Sip] Comment on refer-with-norefersub-01

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 11:55:22 -0500

On Mar 7, 2005, at 4:23 PM, Johnston, Alan wrote:

> In most cases (at least for common ones such as transfer and remote 
> call
> control), the UA issuing the REFER has had some kind of SIP message
> exchange with the REFER recipient.  As a result, the UA will know based
> on a previously received Supported header whether the recipient 
> supports
> the extension before it sends the REFER with Require.
>
> True, this doesn't cover all cases, but these cases seem like the most
> common ones that would want to use this feature.  In other words, the
> main reason for suppressing the subscription is that the UA has another
> method of finding out the result of the REFER, and the number of
> messages is trying to be minimized.
>

Ok, so are we concluding that the text is okay as written, or does it 
need the change Cullen suggested?

C'mon folks, OMA wants to use this draft. We need to close it up, one 
way or another.

--
Dean

_______________________________________________
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

---

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 13:24:44 -0500

It seems like a very common case people want to use this is for click to
dial and in that case, there is no previous signaling.

So far, to my knowledge, no one has provided an argument of how the require
helps in any case. It will reduce interoperability between clients that do
and do not support this. Unless someone has an argument why the require is
needed, I think we should drop it.

(And if using the require on call flows with correctly behaving OMA
endpoints somehow reduced the bandwidth, I'd view that as a reason but so
far no one has provided an example of this)

Cullen