RE: [Sipping] Re: draft-elwell-sipping-service-retargeting-00.txt

["Elwell, John" <[e-mail]>]

Paul,

> I don't know how valid an argument this is, but I am finding an 
> "impedence mismatch" between the approaches in the two 
> drafts, that is 
> disconcerting.
> 
> - In H-I, the reason is associated with the uri that
>    was retargetted-from
> 
> - In draft...retargeting... the reason is associated
>    with the uri that was retargetted-to
> 
> When you combine them, you get one entry with a 
> retargetted-from uri and 
> the reason why retargetting from it happened, and then you 
> get another 
> entry for the retargetted-to uri with the reason why 
> retargetting to it 
> happened. If they agree then they are redundant. If they are 
> different, 
> then one has to deal with why they are different.
> 
> I'd be more comfortable if all the reasons for a particular 
> retargetting 
> were gathered up in *one* place.

[JRE] Your observation is correct. The way we (the authors) looked at is was
that the first entry shows why the attempt to send the request to the first
target failed and the second entry shows why the new target was selected
(e.g., forwarding to it because of busy). I agree it is equally valid to
look at the other way round.

John

_______________________________________________
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