El Friday 18 July 2008 13:09:35 Attila Sipos escribió:
> >>Hi, I've realized that Linksys SPA phones use the following way to set
> >> anonyous caller:
>
> here you go mentioning manufacturers by name again.

Well, I was trying that model... next time I'll say:
 I've realized that XXXXX phone...
:)


> >>Is the first way really RFC compliant? which RFC?
>
> The use of "Anonymous" <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is ok
> but it maybe it doesn't follow the SHOULD of RFC3261.
>
> RFC3261 says:
>    The From header field allows for a display name.  A UAC SHOULD use
>    the display name "Anonymous", along with a syntactically correct, but
>    otherwise meaningless URI (like sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]), if the
>    identity of the client is to remain hidden.
>
> Is "mysip.domain.org" meaningless?  Maybe not. But it's only a SHOULD.

Yes, too much SHOULD in the RFC3261. :(



> RFC323 recommends a format like this:
>    From: "Anonymous" <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;tag=1928301774
>
> But even in RFC3323, the use of anonymous.invalid is only a SHOULD.

Again SHOULD... :(



> And RFC 5079 says using just "Anonymous" is ok but a poor choice:
>     A
>    request SHOULD be considered anonymous when the identity of the
>    originator of the request has been explicitly withheld by the
>    originator.  This occurs in any one of the following cases:
>
>    o  The From header field contains a URI within the anonymous.invalid
>       domain.
>
>    o  The From header field contains a display name whose value is
>       either 'Anonymous' or 'anonymous'.  Note that display names make a
>       poor choice for indicating anonymity, since they are meant to be
>       consumed by humans, not automata.  Thus, language variations and
>       even misspelling can cause an automaton to miss a hint in the
>       display name.  Despite these problems, a check on the display name
>       is included here because RFC 3261 explicitly calls out the usage
>       of the display name as a way to declare anonymity.
>
>      [the list goes on to include 2 other cases]
>
>
> So I'd say ""Anonymous" <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" is ok
> but could be better.

Ok, thanks for so documented response.

Best regards.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to