--On 6. september 2002 23:39 +0700 Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> wrote:
> |
> | "[A]ny P-header used outside of a very restricted research or
> teaching | environment (such as a student lab on implementing
> extensions) MUST | meet those requirements and MUST be documented in
> an RFC and be IANA | registered."
>
> This kind of text in any RFC (or other publication) is no more than an
> attempt at extortion. Nothing published in an RFC can possibly constrain
> what anyone else does, anywhere. Believing otherwise is ludicrous.
note that a MUST in an RFC has no enforcement mechanism whatsoever.
The most that can be said is something akin to "if you do the opposite of
what these words say, and claim to be conformant to this RFC, we will laugh
at you".
So if you start selling out a product that sends P-THIS-IS-NOT-DOCUMENTED
headers, and claim that it is conformant to SIP as specified by the IETF, I
will point to this document and laugh at you.
If that's extortion, then so be it.
Harald