IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: SIP API spec

stev knowles <stev@ftp.com> Fri, 29 January 1993 16:48 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04828; 29 Jan 93 11:48 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04824; 29 Jan 93 11:48 EST
Received: from Sun.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16122; 29 Jan 93 11:50 EST
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (zigzag-bb.Corp.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14102; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:47:02 PST
Received: from sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01531; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:48:36 PST
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (engmail1) by sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA24949; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:46:49 PST
Received: from Sun.COM (sun-barr) by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28997; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:48:38 PST
Received: from ftp.com (babyoil.ftp.com) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14069; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:46:45 PST
Received: from stev.d-cell.ftp.com by ftp.com via PCMAIL with DMSP id AA29777; Fri, 29 Jan 93 11:43:53 -0500
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:43:53 -0500
Message-Id: <9301291643.AA29777@ftp.com>
To: Bob.Gilligan@eng.sun.com
Subject: Re: SIP API spec
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: stev knowles <stev@ftp.com>
Cc: ip-encaps@sunroof.eng.sun.com, sip@caldera.usc.edu
X-Orig-Sender: stev@ftp.com
Repository: babyoil.ftp.com
Originating-Client: d-cell.ftp.com
Content-Length: 1035

an interesting argument. we have never seen this before, and i believe there
are things (like SNMP) that would have benefitted from it. personally, i
would rather you not specify an API, the effort you save is not worth the 
additional debugging and experience you will get with people rolling their
own. this is just my opinion, and should not be construed to go farther than
that.



>> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 18:31:20 -0500
>> From: jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
>>  . . .
>> I am getting the feeling that this specification is being thrown together
>> in a real hurry in an attempt to 'win' some competition. I can't help but
>> feel that this is the wrong road to take to produce a great design....
>
>Actually, we felt the need to write up the API spec because we were
>approaching the point where we would have two independent SIP
>implementations based on BSD unix and we didn't want the two
>implementors to pick different APIs.  I suspect the API will change as
>we get experience converting applications to use SIP.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email