Adam Roach wrote:
Resip currently does *not* use the brackets for v6 addresses on the
received parameter.
OK ... good to know. Thanks.
In practice, the received parameter is interpreted *almost* exclusively
by the entity that wrote it -- so interoperability shouldn't be as
substantially harmed by differing interpretations than might it first
appear.
That depends. A proxy that inserts a received parameter and *then*
forwards the request to the next downstream server may cause some
concern to the receiving server. The specific behavior we have
observed is that the next downstream server is unable to parse the
request because of the brackets in the topmost Via "received"
parameter that were added by the previous upstream entity.
I'm inclined to leave it as is -- the current syntax, although vaguely
nonintuitive, is unambiguous and does not require two-pass parsing to
get right. (If there were a colon-delimited port number, that would make
it more difficult; but the received parameter never contains a port
number).
If most implementations do not use the brackets, then we can let
things stand as they are. In the worst case, we can define a
torture test around this in the SIPPING IPv6 torture test
document that asks implementations to be tolerant of brackets
when receiving SIP messages. It'll be good to get some data
from the upcoming SIPit on more implementation behavior.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani [EMAIL PROTECTED],research.bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, Inc.
2701 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9F-546, Lisle, Illinois 60532 (USA)
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
