Re: [sipcore] AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-sipcore-content-id-05 - PULL REQUEST

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

>>>> I have created a pull request, based on your comments:
>>>> https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-content-id/pull/6
>>> The diff looks fine. We probably want to make sure the WG shares the 
>>> opinion that the Content-ID will never be referenced from outside the 
>>> SIP message.
>>> Jean, do  you have thoughts on that from the shepherd perspective?
>> 
>> The WG did discuss whether the Content-ID could be used outside of the message. 
>> The takeaway was, that since a SIP header has non-MIME fields, the Content-ID can't 
>> really refer to the entire message, and thus would not be useful outside the message.
> 
> There seems to be two ideas intertwined there; namely the idea of what a content-ID identifies, 
> and the idea of whether a content-ID could be referred to from outside the containing SIP message. 
> But I take your comment to mean that both were discussed. Is that correct?

As far as I remember, we did not discuss the possibility of referencing a body outside the SIP message.

However, nobody has requested for that possibility, so I don't think we need to cover it. If someone, as some point, see a need for it, he/she can update the spec and define how it is done, what impacts it has on the uniqueness etc.

Regards,

Christer



>>> However, I wasnąt sure how to address the following comment:
>>> "1.2 and 1.3: A sentence or two that more strongly contrasts "body 
>>> part" vs "message-body" would be helpful. I think that some people 
>>> will think of a message-body as still a body-part.˛ I think section 
>>> 1.1 describes the difference between a message-body and a body-part. 
>>> I donąt think we should copy/paste that in sections 1.2 and 1.3. Or, 
>>> did I misunderstand you comment?
>> On reflection, I think this might be fine like it is. I know that 
>> some people casually refer to the entire body as still a “part”, but 
>> that doesn’t seem to be reflected in the MIME RFCs. Let’s see if 
>> anyone comments in LC.
>>> Regards,
>>> Christer