Subject: [Sip] I-D Action:draft-ietf-sip-body-handling-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 02:00:01 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Session Initiation Protocol Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Message Body Handling in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
	Author(s)       : G. Camarillo
	Filename        : draft-ietf-sip-body-handling-03.txt
	Pages           : 19
	Date            : 2008-08-08

This document specifies how message bodies are handled in SIP.
Additionally, this document specifies SIP user agent support for MIME
(Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) in message bodies.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-body-handling-03.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
_______________________________________________
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: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:29:06 -0400

I took a look at this (actually just the diffs), and it looks fine.

I have one question after reading the additions about multipart/related:

There is talk about extensions that use multipart/related, and what they 
must do. This implies an assumption that it cannot be used *without* an 
exception. Is that the case? If so, is it also the case for other kinds 
of multipart?

My assumption is that, at least for multipart/mixed, no extension is 
required. E.g. I can just put a multipart/mixed body in my INVITE, make 
one body part be SDP, and others be anything I like, whether the 
recipient can make use of them or not.

Similarly for multipart/alternative. I *think* I should be able to take 
any request that currently expects a body part of some type, and put a 
multipart/alternative in, with one part being the expected type, and one 
or more other contained body parts containing what *I* consider to be 
alternatives. E.g. a MESSAGE with a multipart/alternative containing 
text/plain and text/html. And it shouldn't require any extension to 
MESSAGE to support that. Right?

With multipart/related I am inclined to agree that it makes no sense 
without some specification of what the collection is for.

Would it be good to put some words about what is/isn't required into the 
document?

	Thanks,
	Paul