Re: [Sip] Draft ietf-sip-xcapevent revised, many open questions

Byron Campen <bcampen@estacado.net> Wed, 27 May 2009 15:42 UTC

Return-Path: <bcampen@estacado.net>
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF1F3A6892 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fy6LvGSBkSeT for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:42:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from estacado.net (estacado-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:266::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56D23A6859 for <sip@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:42:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dn3-233.estacado.net (dn3-233.estacado.net [172.16.3.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by estacado.net (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n4RFhxmH016136 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:43:59 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from bcampen@estacado.net)
Message-Id: <47F8D2FD-9081-4E9C-96B5-8400FD822477@estacado.net>
From: Byron Campen <bcampen@estacado.net>
To: jari.urpalainen@nokia.com, Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <656509D0-269E-48C4-BA76-0195E1A31B3C@softarmor.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-9-991350767"; micalg="sha1"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 10:43:55 -0500
References: <656509D0-269E-48C4-BA76-0195E1A31B3C@softarmor.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
Cc: "sip@ietf.org List" <sip@ietf.org>, Robert Sparks <rjs@nostrum.com>
Subject: Re: [Sip] Draft ietf-sip-xcapevent revised, many open questions
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 15:42:31 -0000

On May 26, 2009, at 7:35 PM, Dean Willis wrote:
>
>
> 3) SUBSCRIBE bodies
>
> Section 4.4 currently says;
>
>   The SUBSCRIBE request MAY contain an Accept header field.  If no  
> such
>   header field is present, it has a default value of "application/
>   xcap-diff+xml".  If the header field is present, it MUST include
>   "application/xcap-diff+xml", and MAY include any other types.
>
> This doesn't sound right to me.
>

	Yeah, this is what 3265 makes us do (define a default Accept header  
field value for the event package).

	Also, it looks like we lost a right-angle-bracket on the <element>  
open tag in the xcap-diff document in section 5.

	Lastly, I have been meaning to ask; in what cases (if any) would  
sending a SUBSCRIBE 404 be appropriate in this event package? Do we  
establish a subscription even if every uri in the SUBSCRIBE body  
refers to an AUID we don't support? What about uris that are formatted  
in an unsupported way (for example, using "users/bob" when what the  
server really needs is "users/sip:bob@foo"), or that use a document  
name that doesn't exist in the AUID being used (say, "rls- 
services.xml" instead of "index" or "index.xml")? How about uris that  
are outright malformed; it seems that our best choice is a SUBSCRIBE  
400, but what if only one of the uris in the SUBSCRIBE body is in such  
a state? Could we use <xcap-error> documents in some way (provided the  
subscriber supports this format) to help indicate what went wrong in  
these cases?

Best regards,
Byron Campen