<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2008/1/10, Benny Amorsen <<a href="mailto:benny+usenet@amorsen.dk">benny+usenet@amorsen.dk</a>>:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
"Steve Langstaff" <<a href="mailto:steve.langstaff@citel.com">steve.langstaff@citel.com</a>> writes:<br><br>> I agree that sending an OPTION message from the Asterisk server could<br>> well have a low processing load.
<br>><br>> The original poster wanted to use OPTIONS sent FROM the Asterisk server<br>> to query the phone state, so I don't think your concerns about receive<br>> processing come into the picture.<br><br>
If the asterisk community is going to ask the phone manufacturers to<br>comply to the RFC, it looks rather silly</blockquote><div><br>Shall we really care about this ?<br>As Steve said, ourselves not implementing RFC compliant OPTIONS is another topic.
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> when asterisk itself doesn't.<br><br>Not that I have a good solution.</blockquote>
<div><br>Separating problems might help to find such good solution <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">/Benny<br><br>
<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br><br>asterisk-users mailing list<br>To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
<br> <a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a><br></blockquote></div><br>