Hi Satya:
The choice of keeping the version number can be easily explained if one considers backward compatibility. Think of interoperability between a 3261 componenet (UA/PROXY etc.) and an old 2543-compliant component. If you use a new version number in the 3261 component the 2543 component will fail. The magic cookie trick is in effect a version number as you have noted but it allows for backwards compatibility. Ranga. On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Yadavalli, Satyamurthy wrote: > Kirill, > I did read this section which explicitly talks about branch ID: > "..so that servers receiving the request can determine that the branch ID > was constructed in the fashion described by this > specification.." > > Ofcourse, this may be used as (an indirect) means to distinguish between the > two versions. > > Sounds strange though that the SIP/Version was not used for a SIP entity to > explicitly say that it is RFC3261 compliant...probably there were some > reasons for doing so (like many old entities doing strict check for 2.0 > instead of greater than or equal to 2.0)...may have been discussed on the > mailing lists much earlier. > > Thanks, > Satya -- M. Ranganathan Advanced Networking Technologies Divsion National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8920, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Tel: 301 975 3664 ; Fax: 301 590 0932 Advanced Networking Technologies For the People! _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
