1 / 4

Content Indirection in SIP Changes from -04

Content Indirection in SIP Changes from -04. App Interaction-Style Retrieval Protocol Negotiation Contact: mumble;schemes=… Optional Content (e.g., for multipart MIME) RFC3459 (MIME Critical Content Indicator) Content-Disposition Entity Header a MUST from a SHOULD (Clarifying Usage)

tevin
Télécharger la présentation

Content Indirection in SIP Changes from -04

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Content Indirection in SIPChanges from -04 • App Interaction-Style Retrieval Protocol Negotiation • Contact: mumble;schemes=… • Optional Content (e.g., for multipart MIME) • RFC3459 (MIME Critical Content Indicator) • Content-Disposition Entity Header a MUST from a SHOULD (Clarifying Usage) • Indirect Content MUST be One URI Per Body Part (Clarifying Usage) • Hash Parameter is Hex, not base64 draft-ietf-sip-content-indirect-mech-05

  2. NITS Fixed • Protocol definition, not proposal document (Language) • Reference for HTTP URIs Added • Fixed Examples • Added Note: Standard Meanings for multipart/related, multipart/alternative, etc. • E.g., Use multipart/alternative to offer varying fetch options, schemas, etc. • Added Note: Content Description is Explicitly not a Protocol Entity • Don’t Rely On Its Contents for Anything draft-ietf-sip-content-indirect-mech-05

  3. Open Issue #1:etags and Content-ID • Unknown Why Previous Editors Shied Away from Mandating etags • Probably Because Not Always Supported • Probably Because Only for HTTP • Option #1: Suggest etag Be Used for Content-ID for http Content in Normative Section of Document • Option #2: Require etag Be Used for Content-ID for http Content in Normative Section of Document • Option #3: Leave As-Is: • Do What You Want, But Be Aware You Might Get What You Want for Free With etag draft-ietf-sip-content-indirect-mech-05

  4. Open Issue #2:URI Scheme Negotiation • UAC Offers Supported Schemes in Contact Header of Request • UAS Presumably has Registered Schemes • UAC Can Always Query UAS With OPTIONS • UAS Must Support HTTP • Do we Need Full Negotiation Capability? • Option #1: NO: Out of Luck if None Work • Option #2: Yes: Let’s Hack SDP draft-ietf-sip-content-indirect-mech-05

More Related