Hi,
An "empty" Record-Route header is not allowed according to the syntax, so from that point of view it's an error. However, since I can't think (please correct me if I'm wrong) of any header where an empty value would be allowed, and have a special meaning, I guess it's an implementation issue if you just ignore the header or treat it as a syntax error... Personally I see no reason why anyone would want to send an empty header in the first place... Regards, Christer Holmberg Ericsson Finland Rob Phillips wrote: > Suppose a SIP request comes along with a header that has no value, i.e the >Record-Route field below > > INVITE sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP pc33.atlanta.com;branch=z9hG4bK776asdhds > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: Alice <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;tag=1928301774 > Call-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CSeq: 314159 INVITE > Contact: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Record-Route: > Content-Type: application/sdp > Content-Length: 142 > > Should this be accepted as valid and the Record-Route header ignored, or should it >be returned with an error? I think the spec implies that this is an error, but I >could see where it might be implemented the other way. > > - rob > > -- > Rob Phillips, Sr. Software Engineer Netrake Corporation > mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3000 Technology Drive > voice: (214) 291-1096 Suite 100 > fax: (214) 291-1010 http://www.netrake.com Plano, Texas 75074 > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
