[Sipping] Re: [Simple] MESSAGE Exploders draft

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Miguel Garcia wrote:

[...]
>>
>> Instead of saying that message exploders must always send message 
>> requests, we might consider saying the outbound request method must 
>> match the outbound method. This would allow for exploders that know 
>> how to explode more than one method.
> 
> 
> No, I don't agree. In the past we got an agreement that we will create a 
> message-specific exploder draft. There is a draft that says how to deal 
> with INVITE, other for SUBSCRIBE, other for REFER, and this draft is 
> about MESSAGE.  We don't want to go back and make the draft generic, to 
> be applicable to any method. So I believe the wording is correct as it 
> is now.

My concern is, the text as written can be interpreted to mean that 
device cannot be both a MESSAGE exploder and an INVITE exploder, because 
exploding INVITE explicitly violates a normative requirement for MESSAGE 
exploders. I know that is not the intent, but I think it can be misread. 
Perhaps we simply need to say that exploding non-MESSAGE methods is out 
of scope for this document.

Thanks!

Ben.

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
Use [e-mail] for new developments of core SIP