In regard to adding a Session-Id to requests are not given one by the
UAC:
A B2BUA can add one, of course. But a proxy can also add a header to
a request, and can remain strictly RFC 3261 compliant while doing so.
A larger problem is that this added Session-Id is not observable from
the "input" side of the B2BUA, meaning that the correlation between
the incoming Call-Id and the Session-Id can only be reliably extracted
from the B2BUA itself, which obviates much of the value of Session-Id.
However, the B2BUA can create a 100 response to the request that
contains the Session-Id header and can send it to the upstream
element. This makes the added Session-Id manifest to any network
logging.
Which leads to the question of whether we want to include Session-Id
in responses as a matter of course (as we do Call-Id).
Also, given the intended ubiquity of Session-Id, a one-letter
abbreviated header name should be defined.
Dale
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.