Re: The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00
"Spencer Dawkins" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I agree with Jonathan - this is the right way to go. Spencer >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. _______________________________________________ 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