none
ActiveSync "MS-ASProtocolRevisions" header decription missing. RRS feed

  • Question

  • In the document "[MS-ASHTTP].pdf", section 4.2, there is an HTTP example containing the header information "MS-ASProtocolRevisions: 12.1r1".

     

    There is no explanation in the document about what this header pertains to. The name appears to be fairly clear, but the documentation already does not discern well between different versions of ActiveSync, let along revisions of the same version.

    I have a couple of questions here:

    1. An explanation of what has changed between ActiveSync 12.1 and ActiveSync 12.1 revision 1 would be nice.
    2. I'd also like to know the reasoning for specifying revisions rather than simply adding a new protocol version if something has changed.
    3. Also, how would a server know which revision of ActiveSync a device is using?

     

    Thanks in advance.

    Monday, June 14, 2010 1:54 PM

Answers

  • Hi Jed -

    We don't have any unpublished documents that we could provide in this instance. However, in our investigation of this issue, we determined that the information regarding the headers is incorrect as you will not see minor revision marks or even the header in a released version of Exchange. This change will be reflected in the next release of this document. 


    Thanks - Chris
    • Edited by Chris Mullaney Thursday, July 1, 2010 9:41 PM formatting
    • Marked as answer by Jed Ecker Tuesday, July 6, 2010 4:59 PM
    Thursday, July 1, 2010 9:41 PM

All replies

  • Hi, Jed,

      Thanks for your questions.  One of our team member will work on these questions and respond to you when the investigationis done.

     

     


    Hongwei Sun -MSFT
    Monday, June 14, 2010 2:48 PM
  •  Jed, I will try to address each of your questions…

    1. The only way to tell what changed between versions is to refer to the Change Tracking section of each document. Including a more complete revision history is something that has been under consideration. You would need to refer to the 12.1 rev 1 version of the documents to see what changed from 12.1. However, unless you have licensed those documents you will need to try to find another customer who has and is willing to share them with you. Here is a link to a similar thread with some additional details.
    1. This is not something that I can comment on.
    1. Most command requests (example) that are sent from a device  include the MS-ASProtocolVersion header. The value of this header tells you what version of the protocol is supported by the device.

    Josh Curry (jcurry) | Sr. Support Escalation Engineer | US-CSS DSC Protocols Team
    Wednesday, June 16, 2010 7:34 PM
    Moderator
  • Thank you; I understand that t he protocol version is sent in a parameter from the device, however there is no URL parameter for the device to use to specify a revision number that I am aware of.

    We have archived all previous released versions of this document, and the header that specifies 12.1 revision 1 does not appear in this document before document revision 2.0, which is the same revision that changes the documentation to apply to protocol version 14.0. Because of this there is no set of documents that refers strictly to protocol 12.1 revision 1; IE, the documents skip from 12.1 no revision to 14.0. Without seeing a device explicitly request 12.1 revision 1 vs 12.1 no revision or having a document just for 12.1 revision 1, we have no way of telling what has changed.

    If there is an unpublished revision between revisions 1.02 and 2.0 that would show this difference and there is a way to license/request it, please provide details for this process.

    Thanks.

    Friday, June 18, 2010 2:57 PM
  • Hi Jed -

    We don't have any unpublished documents that we could provide in this instance. However, in our investigation of this issue, we determined that the information regarding the headers is incorrect as you will not see minor revision marks or even the header in a released version of Exchange. This change will be reflected in the next release of this document. 


    Thanks - Chris
    • Edited by Chris Mullaney Thursday, July 1, 2010 9:41 PM formatting
    • Marked as answer by Jed Ecker Tuesday, July 6, 2010 4:59 PM
    Thursday, July 1, 2010 9:41 PM
  • That works for me, if you are updating the doc. Thank you very much for your time.
    Tuesday, July 6, 2010 5:00 PM