Hi Vijay,
To answer your question:
In our implementation, which we will test at SIPit next week,
we currently use the square brackets as delimiters in the "received"
parameter.
Best regards,
Ben.
Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
>Folks: Before the Dallas IETF, I had sent an email to gauge
>consensus on whether the "received" parameter should have the
>delimiters '[' and ']' when its content is an IPv6 address.
>That is:
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP foo.example.com;received=[2001::db8];branch=...
>
>versus:
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP foo.example.com;received=2001::db8;branch=...
>
>RFC 3261 ABNF indicates the latter; i.e., without the delimiters.
>However, there is some precedence for encapsulating literal IPv6
>addresses in square brackets when it is contained in a URL (see
>RFC 2732). Furthermore, having a '[' is much amenable to the
>parser since one can know at the outset that the received parameter
>contains an IPv6 address. The SIP IPv6 torture test draft has
>the received encapsulated in the square brackets (see
>draft-sipping-gurbani-ipv6-sip-02).
>
>Can folks who have IPv6 implementations kindly post what their
>behavior is? Also, does anyone know how reSIProcate treats this?
>With the SIPit coming up, I would like to see if we can reach a
>consensus on this. It would be good to know how the implementations
>are treating this.
>
>The link to my original post is given below, followed by another
>link to a followup post on why having the IPv6 encapsulated in
>square brackets may be more consistent with expectations.
>
>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg10341.html
>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg10373.html
>
>Thanks,
>
>- vijay
>_______________________________________________
>Sip-implementors mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
