Re: [Sip-implementors] Record-Route

[Jonathan Rosenberg]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hi,
     I can't imagine why Record-Route was mandated in
401/484 at that point in time.

Because 401/484, and a few others, genreally are followed by another request. So, the RR in those resposnes would provide the path for sending the new INVITE. As Subash pointed out, this behavior was abandoned early on. The route set has an ill-defined scope.



Even if it was, ACK to

such responses must not contain Route headers since
the ACK to any non-2xx should follow the same path as
the original INVITE. Including Route headers in the ACK
would violate this basic requirement.

Correct.

-Jonathan R.
--
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

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