In fact it is not allowed as per RFC-2543-bis02 also.
The syntax is
(From RFC-2543-bis02)
        callid   =  token [ "@" token ]
        Call-ID  =  ( "Call-ID" | "i" ) ":" callid

(From RFC-2616 which the bis refers)
       token          = 1*<any CHAR except CTLs or separators>
       separators     = "(" | ")" | "<" | ">" | "@"
                      | "," | ";" | ":" | "\" | <">
                      | "/" | "[" | "]" | "?" | "="
                      | "{" | "}" | SP | HT

However RFC-2543 used to allow it,
the following is the syntax extraction from RFC-2543
        Call-ID   =  ( "Call-ID" | "i" ) ":" local-id "@" host
        local-id  =  1*uric

  uric            = reserved | unreserved | escaped
  reserved        = ";" | "/" | "?" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" |
                    "$" | ","

Cheers,
Prasanna
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:sip-implementors-admin@;cs.columbia.edu]On Behalf Of Christer
Holmberg
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 6:38 PM
To: Ramachandran Iyer
Cc: satya; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] a doubt in SIP header (call-id)



Hi,

The syntax for the callid value in RFC3261 is "word [ "@" word ]". The
use of the "localid@host" format is simply one way to make the string
value unique, so is there a reason you want to "split" the value into
different parts (localid, host etc) in the first place?

The "@" character is to my understanding NOT part of "word", so
according to RFC3261 "Call-ID:
87602@[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is not a valid Call-ID value
- no matter which part of the string value you would treat as localid
and which part you treat as host...

word        =  1*(alphanum / "-" / "." / "!" / "%" / "*" / "_" / "+" /
"`" / "'" / "~" / "(" / ")" / "<" / ">" / ":" / "\" / DQUOTE / "/" / "["
/ "]" / "?" / "{" / "}" )

I don't remember what RFC2543 says about the use of the "@" character in
the Call-ID value, and I don't have the document in front of me, so
unfortunately I can't comment on any possible backward compability
issue.

Regards,

Christer Holmberg
Ericsson Finland

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to