That sounds like a bug to me. I don't see any reason to allow the colon
when the port value is null.
On Jan 23, 2005, at 8:29 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
Uh, I see what you mean...I'll leave this to Ben but I would have
thought
msrp://[EMAIL PROTECTED] is legal but not when used in SDP
msrp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]:1234 is legal everywhere
msrp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]: seems pretty weird as a legal thing to me - I
guess
we would follow what other URLs have done
On 1/21/05 5:27 AM, "Christian Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The syntax allows port to be null.
That being said, the MSRP spec requires an explicit value for port
whenever the MSRP URL is exchanged in the SDP. But the MSRP relay
spec
allows for a null port in certain narrow circumstances.
Just checking, msrp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]: would be valid? (notice the ":"
on the end). If not, the idea proposed to have port = 1*digit seems
good.
/ Christian
Hope this helps!
Ben.
On Jan 19, 2005, at 3:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
As per the grammar of Msrp-Url,
MSRP_urls = msrp-scheme "://" [userinfo "@"] hostport ["/"
resource] ";" transport
and hostport as per RFC2396 is:
hostport = host [ ":" port ]
port = *digit
The doubt is that ,can the port be NULL or it should have been
port =1 *digit
Please clarify the doubt.
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
