Re: [Sipping] New draft: Extending the SIP Reason Header with Warning Codes

A comment on the warning extension for anonymous call rejection.

I don't understand why we need a warning value for this. I think we are 
better off just defining a new response code for it (see separate 
discussion on extending reasons for rejection).

-Jonathan R.

Jani Hautakorpi (JO/LMF) wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> We submitted the following draft couple of days ago:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hautakorpi-reason-header-for-warnings-00.txt
> 
> We would like to welcome all kinds of feedback to our draft, and
> especially comments related to 'open issue' stated in Section 5.
> 
> 

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Director, Service Provider VoIP Architecture   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
jdrosen@cisco.com                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP