Re: [martini] New text for gin section 7.1.1 first paragraph

[Hadriel Kaplan <[e-mail]>]

On Sep 29, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:

> Then why don't we just change all the MUSTs and SHOULDs in gin to MAYs 
> ??? The users can negotiate with their SSP over which ones are supported.

Because most of them impact interoperability for GIN itself? 

We can think getting a GRUU is a basic capability, but existence proof says otherwise.  Unless wireshark is hiding all the GRUU parameters. ;)

Unless I misunderstand the intention, to me a "globally routable URI" means the URI is generally resolvable/usable from anywhere on the Internet.  How many SSPs do you know accept requests from everything on the Internet, or route them using domain names and public DNS?  Not many, in the grand scheme of things.

If an enterprise like Acme uses GIN with SSP-X and Cisco uses GIN with SSP-Y, do you think Cisco can use a URI like "sip:[e-mail];gr=urn:uuid:f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6;sg=00:05:03:5e:70:a6" if it got one from Acme somehow?  SSP-X won't accept any requests from Cisco, and SSP-Y won't be able to route that URI.  Does that mean SSP-X and SSP-Y can't do GIN??

-hadriel