Dean,
I agree that "will" is problematic, but I was
having trouble coming up
with a suitable word. Maybe I can just use a lot of words
instead:
Instead of *could* be used, perhaps "capable of
using" is better.
Equivalent to Supported.
By *may* I meant that if there is a need to signal this sort
of thing,
then this mechanism MUST be used to do it.
So, Alice says:
I am capable of sending and receiving DTMF via this INFO
technique.
(And at the same time may also be offering the
telephone-events
payload type in the SDP.)
And then Bob says:
I am capable of sending DTMF via this INFO technique.
I select that this INFO technique will be the technique I
use to
send DTMF to you. I don't receive DTMF this way, so don't
send it
to me.
(And at the same time rejects the telephone-events
payload type in the SDP answer.)
Paul
Dean Willis wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>>
>> It seems to me that there is a need to know what
*will* be used as
>> well as what *could* be used. This is especially
the case when there
>> are multiple possible mechanisms to accomplish the
same thing and one
>> is being chosen. That is the situation with DTMF.
>>
>>
>
> I'm still thinking at the level of what "MAY"
be used. We don't know
> what "will" be used until it happens.
Sometimes those decisions aren't
> made until runtime -- and sometimes, they never get
made at all.
>
> As Douglas Adams points out, the invention of time
travel will have
> caused a change to human language, eliminating the
future perfect tense,
> as the future will have been found not to have been
perfect. Or
> something like that.
>
> --
> Dean
>
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://ww
w1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors cs.columbia.edu for questions on current
sip
Use sippingietf.org for new developments on the application of
sip
|
