Hi
I have a basic doubt on formation of record route header
If there is a request received by proxy which has the topmost route header
with SIP URI and 'transport=tls' and the request URI also has the
SIP URI (without the 'transport=tls' parameter), then should the proxy
insert a sips record-route header while forwarding the message to the
callee, or should it insert a SIP URI with a 'transport=tls' parameter?
The RFC does not seem to mention anything about this specific case.
Following are the references mentioned in RFC 3261
But which of them apply for this special case?
As per the RFC section 16.6 bullet 4 of RFC 3261,
Reference 1 :
If the Request-URI contains a SIPS URI, or the topmost Route header
field value (after the post processing of bullet 6) contains a SIPS URI,
the URI placed into the Record-Route header field MUST be a SIPS URI.
Reference 2:
In a similar fashion, a proxy that receives a request
over TLS, but generates a request without a SIPS URI in the
Request-URI or topmost Route header field value (after the post
processing of bullet 6), MUST insert a Record-Route header field that is
not a SIPS URI.
Reference 3: RFC Section 26.2.2
Note that in the SIPS URI scheme, transport is independent of TLS,
and thus "sips:[EMAIL PROTECTED];transport=tcp" and
"sips:[EMAIL PROTECTED];transport=sctp" are both valid (although
note that UDP is not a valid transport for SIPS). The use of
"transport=tls" has consequently been deprecated, partly because
it was specific to a single hop of the request. This is a change
since RFC 2543.
According to Reference 2, in this case, should proxy insert the SIP URI
with "tansport=TLS" in record route header as the topmost route header is
of that form?
But RFC Reference 3 also mentions that the use of "transport=tls" has
consequently been deprecated.
Hence the question here is, if request URI has SIP and topmost routeheader
has SIP with "transport = TLS"
then the proxy inserting record route header of form SIP URI with
"transport=TLS" valid? or should proxy always insert the SIPS record route
as the "transport=TLS" has been depricated?
Is there any reason why the proxy should not insert a sips record-route but
instead use a sip uri with a transport parameter just becuase the Route
header is of this latter form?
I request others to provide their valuable opinion on this issue.
thanks and regards
Seema
*********************** FSS-Private ***********************
*********************** FSS-Private ***********************
*********************** FSS-Private ***********************
*********************** FSS-Private ***********************
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Flextronics Software Systems
Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or
confidential information and should not be circulated or used for
any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the originator immediately.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are
strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing
the contents of this message. FSS accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage arising from the use of the information transmitted
by this email including damage from virus."
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
