[Sip] unsubscribe
Hil <dvbetty@yahoo.com> Sat, 31 August 2002 04:29 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA15184 for <sip-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:29:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7V4UKe11009 for sip-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:30:20 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7V4Too10950; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:29:50 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7V4RXo10876 for <sip@optimus.ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:27:33 -0400
Received: from web12804.mail.yahoo.com (web12804.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA14949 for <sip@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:25:52 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <20020831042723.21202.qmail@web12804.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [63.249.65.235] by web12804.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 21:27:23 PDT
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 21:27:23 -0700
From: Hil <dvbetty@yahoo.com>
To: sip@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20020829160000.22484.25975.Mailman@www1.ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: [Sip] unsubscribe
Sender: sip-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
--- sip-request@ietf.org wrote: > Send Sip mailing list submissions to > sip@ietf.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, > visit > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > or, via email, send a message with subject or body > 'help' to > sip-request@ietf.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sip-admin@ietf.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it > is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Sip digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. RE: What's the Changes? (Dean Willis) > 2. asserted-identity-02 (Rohan Mahy) > 3. Record-route uri must be sip or sips > (hisham.khartabil@nokia.com) > 4. Session Timer Issues and Proposal (Tirthankar > Saha) > 5. Re: Record-route uri must be sip or sips > (Robert Sparks) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > From: "Dean Willis" <dean.willis@softarmor.com> > To: <y01317@njupt.edu.cn>, <sip@ietf.org> > Subject: RE: [Sip] What's the Changes? > Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 15:18:12 -0500 > > > Fixed two errors in the abnf that had been left over > from ripping out > the p- stuff. Clarified discussion of the relevance > of sip-change > process in the IANA considerations section. Cleaned > up some of the > wording around Alternatve 3 to say that the > referenced inbound routing > technique with look-up tables is used in some 3G > networks. > > In other words, it is very likely that you will > notice any change at all > unless you were one of the people who specifically > requested a change. > > -- > Dean > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: sip-admin@ietf.org > [mailto:sip-admin@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of feng zhang > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 8:00 AM > > To: sip@ietf.org > > Subject: [Sip] What's the Changes? > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > Who can tell me the CHANGES between > > draft-ietf-sip-scvrtdisco-00 and > draft-ietf-sip-scvrtdisco-01 ? > > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > Best Regards. > > _______________________________________________ > > Sip mailing list > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP > Protocol > > Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions > on current > > sip Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on > the > > application of sip > > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 18:49:19 -0700 > Cc: mankin@psg.com, fluffy@cisco.com, > jon.peterson@neustar.biz, > Mark Watson <mwatson@nortelnetworks.com>, > rohan@cisco.com > To: sip@ietf.org > From: Rohan Mahy <rohan@cisco.com> > Subject: [Sip] asserted-identity-02 > > Hi Folks, > > As someone pointed out in Yokohama, the > asserted-identity-01 draft that > was in the archives then did not reflect WG > consensus on the matter of > separate header vs. same header for the hint. (This > was due to a > coordination SNAFU as the draft went to IESG > review.) The -02 version of > asserted identity that just appeared in the archive > corrected this > inconsistency. > > thanks, > -rohan > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 3 > From: hisham.khartabil@nokia.com > Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 10:10:14 +0300 > To: <sip@ietf.org> > Subject: [Sip] Record-route uri must be sip or sips > > Section 16.6 item 4 states that > > "The URI placed in the Record-Route header field > value MUST be a > SIP or SIPS URI" > > But the grammar for record-route allows absolute > URI. Why allow it in the grammar? > > Regards, > Hisham > > --__--__-- > > Message: 4 > From: "Tirthankar Saha" <tsaha@del3.vsnl.net.in> > To: "SIP Mailing List" <sip@ietf.org> > Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 15:58:09 +0530 > Subject: [Sip] Session Timer Issues and Proposal > > Hello folks, > > I feel there are some issues with the Sip Session > Timer spec and that it can > be > made simpler and more useful. I'm submitting a rough > proposal for improving > the spec and would appreciate your comments. > > I haven't followed any previous discussions on this > issue on the mailing > list, so I might be missing something. I thought > that the shortcomings would > be addressed in a later version of the draft but it > hasn't happened. So > before this draft attains RFC status like all the > other ones, it's better > that we have another discussion on this topic. > > Regards, > > Tirthankar > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Issues: > > 1) Why do we have to refresh the session with a > re-INVITE? > > Lots of unnecessary processing for a simple > keepalive. > - 3 way handshake > - sdp re-negotiation & possible re-opening of > media channels > > This could have been justified earlier when the > refresh-intervals were > recommended to be 30 mins. but this feature is now > being considered to be > used for keeping the NAT bindings alive. This means > that the > refresh-intervals are going to be as low as 30secs. > > I think using the re-INVITE to refresh a dialog is > seriously flawed; I can't > think of any good reason for having this procedure. > We MUST address this issue ASAP. > > > 2) Unnecessary processing & complications with > "refresher" param. > > What do we gain by negotiating who's going to be the > referesher? > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
- [Sip] unsubscribe Sarah Wesslink
- [Sip] unsubscribe VIDHI RASTOGI
- [Sip] unsubscribe Hil
- [Sip] unsubscribe Brambach, Dirk, VF Terenci
- [Sip] unsubscribe Raj Sahu
- [Sip] unsubscribe Karnam, Swamy
- [SIP] unsubscribe Lieve Bos