Hi Eric, The call flows document is in error - I will add the Contact in the 180 response. Thanks for pointing it out.
As for Table 2 in RFC 3261, the row you are referring to is for 1xx, which includes 100 Trying, in which a Contact is not mandatory, so I think the table is correct as it stands. Thanks, Alan Johnston WorldCom sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] At 05:12 PM 10/2/2002 -0400, Eric Cheung wrote: >Hi > >I would like to seek clarification on whether UAS needs to put Contact >header in 180 Ringing in response to an INVITE: > >In RFC3261 section 13.3.1.1: > ... provisional response between 101 and 199. These provisional >responses establish early dialogs and therefore follow the procedures of >Section 12.1.1 in addition to those of Section 8.2.6. > >and section 12.1.1: > The UAS MUST add a Contact header field to the response. > >So it seems the UAS MUST put Contact header in 180 response. > >But in RFC3261 table 2, Contact is listed as optional. Also in >draft-ietf-sipping-call-flows-01.txt sec 3.1.1 F2 Contact header is >absent. > >Where did I go wrong? > >Thanks >Eric >_______________________________________________ >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
