Re: Byte reduction in BEEP commands.

[Doug Royer <Doug@xxxxxxxxx>]

Patrice Lapierre wrote:
> 
> > Doug Royer wrote:
> ...
> >
> > I also propose changing the REPLY from the CS to be an EMPTY
> > BEEP reply for success. Eliminating the the not needed 2.0
> > success code. If the BEEP reply contains any data, then
> > parse that iCalendar data.
> >
> 
>   That would be awkward. I would tend to keep something in the
> payload (even if it's just <ok/>).
> 
>   Draft-06 uses a distinct ANS for each target in the command.
> And part of the payload was to indicate to which target the
> reply correspond. If there is a need to minimize the byte count,
> then it may make sense to allow a single ANS (or RPY) to refer to
> many targets with identical replies (e.g. success). But I would
> not remove the target(s) from the reply.

CMDID used to be optional and only needed when you did 
pipelineing. I don't see any need for CMDID when there is
only one command issued at a time.  When the CUA issues
more than one command without waiting for all of replies
to outstanding commands, then CMDID is needed.

Do you agree?

begin:vcard 
n:Royer;Doug
tel;pager:pager@xxxxxxxxx
tel;cell:208-520-4044
tel;fax:866-594-8574
tel;work:866-594-8574
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://Royer.com/People/Doug
org:INET-Consulting LLC <http://INET-Consulting.com
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:Doug@xxxxxxxxx
title:Chief Executive Manager
x-mozilla-cpt:;64
fn:Doug Royer
end:vcard