Re: The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00

Ooh, good point.  Fair enough, I'll change that.

-hadriel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Rosenberg
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:51 PM
> To: IETF SIP List
> Subject: [Sip] The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00
> 
> I didnt get a chance to say this at the mike.
> 
> You *cannot* change the BNF for the call-id. If you did, you might end
> up with the following problem:
> 
> A new UA gets built, compliant to this update. It is one of these
> 'aggressive parsing' UAs. It rejects any message which is not compliant
> to the BNF. An older, normal RFC-3261 compliant UA sends a call-id which
> includes the @-sign.
> 
> According to the BNF of this updated 3261, and based on the strictness
> of this aggressive-parsing UAs, it rejects that request as non-compliant.
> 
> As such, you need to keep the BNF, but change the normative language
> such that an endpoint MUST NOT include the [@ host] but MUST be prepared
> to receive it.
> 
> -Jonathan R.
> 
> --
> Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   111 Wood Avenue South
> Cisco Fellow                                   Iselin, NJ 08830
> Cisco, Voice Technology Group
> [email protected]
> http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (408) 902-3084
> http://www.cisco.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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