Re: [dispatch] New version for the Alert-Info URNs draft: draft-liess-dispatch-alert-info-urns-00.txt

[Dean Willis <[e-mail]>]

On Oct 28, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:

>
>
> Dean Willis wrote:
>> Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>>> But that works more easily if the Alert-Info URNs are mutually
>>> exclusive, so the recipient just chooses one it understands and  
>>> renders
>>> that.
>>>
>>> But I guess it can still work in the multi-dimensional approach.  
>>> Each
>>> URN that is understood must imply the values of one or more of those
>>> dimensions.
>> this is starting to sound like multipart/related and multipart/ 
>> alternative.
>> Perhaps we are barking up the wrong tree, and alerts should be body
>> parts selected by a new content-disposition?
>
> Did you imply a smiley on this message?
>
> On the off chance that you did not, its important that it be  
> possible for intermediaries to add the Alert-Info, which pretty much  
> excludes using body parts.

Not if the intermediaries are B2BUAs.  I'm wondering about alert-info  
and authentication. Perhaps anything that can change the alerting  
model really OUGHT to be a B2BUA and capable of re-authenticating the  
request.

--
Dean