Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:
> 
> Sarju Garg wrote:
> 
>  > Hi all,
>  >
>  > Normally all the common fields or mandatory ones in SIP message has
>  > a compact form with the exception for CSeq. Why?
> 
> I think because it got added as a header much after the previous ones,
> and somehow it didn't get a short form.
> 
>  > Can we have one
>  > for it also?
> 
> No. Its not backwards compatible at all.
> 

It was also felt that CSeq is sufficiently short that it wasn't worth
the hassle once we noticed that it had been omitted.
-- 
Henning Schulzrinne   http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to