Re: [Sipping] Re: [Simple] MESSAGE Exploders draft

["Niemi Aki (Nokia-M/Espoo)" <[e-mail]>]

ext Miguel Garcia wrote:

[snip]

>> Saying the exploder MUST NOT include the URI list in the outbound 
>> messages seems a little severe. I can imagine applications where I
>>  want the recipients to know the list. This could be useful for
>> "reply to all" sort of functions. But if we do allow this, we would
>> need to give the sender a way to choose, possibly on a per-URI
>> basis. (Sort of a "cc" vs. "bcc" thing.)
> 
> 
> It seems reasonable to me. I think what we wanted to say is that the
>  Request-URI of the outboud message SHOULD NOT contain a list
> parameter. The body need not carry the list, but may carry it for
> other purposes (such as the one you mentioned).

I agree.

One other thing, to convey such Cc information to the final recipients
of the explosion, message/cpim actually seems like a very good fit. It
already has the To, Cc headers defined, and the sender can populate them
as it sees fit and the exploder need not care. Including a URI in the
MESSAGE resource list, but omitting it from the To, CC in message/cpim
would result in exactly the Bcc-type behavior.

Cheers,
Aki


_______________________________________________
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