Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-directory-type-00.txt

From: Markus Buchhorn <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:54:56 +1100

>>    This may imply that the use of m=directory is referencing a top level
>>    MIME directory type, which is presumably not intended?
>
>Good point.  I'm not a MIME expert - perhaps the format name should instead 
>be "application/directory", i.e.,
>         m=application/directory <port> SAP

application/sdp is registered - so should it be a subtype e.g.
application/sdp.directory ?

Or perhaps in the grander scheme, with multipart MIME messages, perhaps
multipart/sdp(.directory) should be registered, which would then look
similar to multipart emails (with each part containing its own specific
MIME typed element). Isn't a (sdp) directory really just a multipart
container ? 

See http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/media-types/

>??  Is this consistent with the use of MIME to specify other (existing) 
>kinds of 'directory' - e.g., LDAP?  (I can imagine that in the future we 
>might also want to allow for SDP descriptions that describe LDAP 
>directories.)  Anyway, I'll make sure to raise this issue in Adelaide.

There's a text/directory (rfc2425) registered, which seems to be quite
extensible as well. That in turn can have multipart components?

I can't find a MIME type that just refers to LDAP - that's really a
transport (directory access) rather than a container.

Just my $AU0.02

Cheers,
	Markus

Markus Buchhorn,  Advanced Computational Systems CRC     | Ph: +61 2 62798810
email: [email-masked], snail: ACSys, RSISE Bldg,|Fax: +61 2 62798602
Australian National University, Canberra 0200, Australia |Mobile: 0417 281429