On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 16:22 +0100, Sigrid Thijs wrote: > According to RFC 3261 (section 12.2.1.1), the UAC must place the remote > target URI into the Request-URI if the route set is empty. > > Is it allowed to send an ACK with a Request-URI like this: > "ACK sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;transport=UDP SIP/2.0" > > or should the URI parameters of the Contact header be ignored?
It is syntactically valid to do that, and RFC 3261 prescribes that. Looking at section 8.1.2 "Sending the Request", which references RFC 3263, and looking at it's section 4.1 "Selecting a Transport Protocol", the lower layers of the SIP stack should use "transport=udp" to determine that the request must be sent via UDP. So the stated rules in the RFCs seem to be consistent and produce the results that one desires and would expect. Dale --- interop.pingtel.com -- the public SIP phone interoperability test server _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
