Subject: RE: [Simple] 200 vs. 202

From: "Ngo, Dai (c)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 16:52:20 +0000

I agree that there is no need to send an immediate, empty NOTIFY after a 202
was sent in the pending case.
-- Dai
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Moran Tim (NET/Dallas) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 10:33 AM
To: 'ext Paul Kyzivat'; Jonathan Rosenberg
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Simple] 200 vs. 202
 
My comments are in line.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[email-masked]
<mailto:[email-masked]> ]
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 8:04 AM
> To: Jonathan Rosenberg
> Cc: Moran Tim (NET/Dallas); [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Simple] 200 vs. 202
>
>

Seems you are both saying the same thing. I seem to recall an earlier
dialogue where it was stated that non-Invite requests are treated
differently than Invites in that only one response in sent back to the
"Subscriber" in this case.  So it would appear that the PA (with proxy
capabilities) will wait some predetermined amount of time to collect all of
the responses (or until all are received whichever comes first) and send
back the best response. If the best is a 202, then does the proxy wait for
the Notify and send the 202+Notify or just the 202 and the Notify later? I
guess I don't see the need for a 202 indicating pending followed immediately
by another message (Notify with no real status) which adds no value.

---

From: "James Undery" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 11:11:49 +0100

I'd like to agree with you too, unfortunately it's a CPIM requirement
as 2xx are successful responses. The SIMPLE charter requires CPIM
complience.

James

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Ngo, Dai (c)
Sent: 05 October 2001 17:52
To: 'Moran Tim (NET/Dallas)'; 'ext Paul Kyzivat'; Jonathan Rosenberg
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Simple] 200 vs. 202

I agree that there is no need to send an immediate, empty NOTIFY after
a 202 was sent in the pending case.
-- Dai

-----Original Message-----
From: Moran Tim (NET/Dallas) [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 10:33 AM
To: 'ext Paul Kyzivat'; Jonathan Rosenberg
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Simple] 200 vs. 202

My comments are in line.

> From: ext Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[email-masked]]

Seems you are both saying the same thing. I seem to recall an earlier
dialogue where it was stated that non-Invite requests are treated
differently than Invites in that only one response in sent back to the
"Subscriber" in this case.  So it would appear that the PA (with proxy
capabilities) will wait some predetermined amount of time to collect
all of the responses (or until all are received whichever comes first)
and send back the best response. If the best is a 202, then does the
proxy wait for the Notify and send the 202+Notify or just the 202 and
the Notify later? I guess I don't see the need for a 202 indicating
pending followed immediately by another message (Notify with no real
status) which adds no value.