[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Comments on draft-peterson-rai-rfc3427bis-02.txt

Subject: Re: Comments on draft-peterson-rai-rfc3427bis-02.txt
From: Adam Roach
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:00:37 -0500
Bernard Aboba wrote:
Do all [SIP] option tags really need to be standards track?

I would argue that they do. Option tags define normative extensions to the core SIP protocol. The prospect of defining a SIP protocol extension in, say, an informational or historical document seems rather ill-advised. Even an experimental document is probably the wrong place to put extensions to core SIP protocol handling.

I would feel even more uneasy about allowing non-IETF documents to define option tags: the types of extensions that would necessitate an options tag usually add enough semantics to the protocol that it would be foolish to condone their creation without IESG review.

Ietf mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Comments on draft-peterson-rai-rfc3427bis-02.txt, Adam Roach <=