Comments inline:

>Prakash GS wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi all
>>        I have a query regarding url comparison .
>>        Suppose i send a REGISTER message to a proxy+registrar  with the
>>To
>>field as:
>>
>>        To: prakashgs
>><sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];USER=ip>;generic-param=xyz
>>
>>        Then for an updating registration, should the URL comparison
>>take
>>into account  the generic-param ?
>>        OR is the comparison limited only to the url parameters :
>>user,ttl,method,maddr,transport parameters.
>>    
>>
>
>No, no parameters are used. See bullet 5 of section 10.3 in bis-09,
>which reads:
>
>The registrar extracts the address-of-record from the To header field of
>the request. If the address-of- record is not valid for the domain in
>the Request-URI, the registrar MUST send a 404 (Not Found) 1705
>response and skip the remaining steps. The URI MUST then be converted to
>a canonical form. To do 1706
>that, all URI parameters MUST be removed (including the user-param), and
>any escaped characters 1707
>MUST be converted to their unescaped form. The result serves as an index
>into the list of bindings. 1708
>
>
>In other words, its JUST the user@host part.
>
>  
>
>>        I have the same doubt  regarding comparison of Contact
>>parameters as
>>per SIP Caller Preferences Draft-05.
>>        For a Contact URL comparison , does the comparison apply to  ALL
>>parameters in the Contact or only to parameters that are specific to the
>>Contact.
>>    
>>
>
>The comparison is only done on the URIs, not on the contact parameters
>(which are not URI parameters). So, if I first register:
>
>Contact: sip:user@domain;mobility=fixed
>
>and then later:
>
>Contact: sip:user@domain;mobility=mobile
>
>the second registration replaces the previous since the contact URI are
>identical.
>
>  
>

Didn't you mean  this?:

Contact: <sip:user@domain>;mobility=fixed

and then later:

Contact <sip:user@domain>;mobility=mobile



Otherwise mobility would be a parameter of the contact address and 
affect the uri comparisons done on the list of current registrations. 
 In your example the second Contact would produce a new binding since it 
wouldn't compare equal to any existing bindings according to the uri 
comparison rules in 19.1.4 in bis-09.

Or are you saying that the mobility really is a parameter of the contact 
address and that it should be removed according to bullet 5 of section 
10.3 in bis-09?   I thought that covered the address in the To header, 
not the Contact.

Can you please clarify?

Josh


_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to