Inline.
Attila Sipos wrote:
>
> I have a question regarding section "12.2.1.1 Generating the Request"
> in RFC2543 bis-09.
>
>
>> If the route set is not empty, and its first URI does not contain the
>> lr parameter, the UAC MUST place the first URI from the route set
>> into the Request-URI, stripping any parameters that are not allowed
>> in a Request-URI. The UAC MUST add a Route header field containing
>> the remainder of the route set values in order, including all
>> parameters. The UAC MUST then place the remote target URI into the
>> Route header field as the last value.
>>
>> For example, if the remote target is sip:user@remoteua and the route
>> set contains
>>
>> <sip:proxy1>,<sip:proxy2>,<sip:proxy3;lr>,<sip:proxy4>
>>
>>
>> The request will be formed with the following Request-URI and Route
>> header field:
>>
>> METHOD sip:proxy1
>> Route: <sip:proxy2>,<sip:proxy3;lr>,<sip:proxy4>,<sip:user@remoteua>
>>
>
> The last sentence in the first paragraph says:
> "The UAC MUST then place the remote target URI into the
> Route header field as the last value."
>
> My question:
> Is the remote traget URI added to the "route set"?
Yes; it is appended to the Route set. Note that the first entry
in the Route set did not have a "lr" parameter; thus this entity
is not -09bis compliant. If the first entry in the Route set had
a "lr" parameter, then the UAC would have moved the remote target
URI to the Request-URI and send the request to the topmost Route
entry.
The "lr" parameter disassociates proxy routing from the final
recepient of the request.
Regards,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani vkg@{lucent.com,research.bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Wireless Networks Group/Internet Software and Services
Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs Innovations, 2000 Lucent Lane, Rm 6G-440
Naperville, Illinois 60566 Voice: +1 630 224 0216
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
