>>>>> IЯaki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyway, if SIP wouldn't be SOOOOO permissive, if it would be more > restrictive, > implementations would be easier, more effective and with better performance. > But no, instead of that let's allow any kind of symbols, escaping, ridiculous > URI headers, painful URI comparissions that NOBODY implements (19.1.4), etc > etc...
This is common IETF problem: it's occupied by grammatists with paranoia of permissive approach. Another example is case-insensitive matching in text protocols, which requires to spend memory for copy of any header, field or attribute name which is written in non-canonic form (e.g. "Call-ID" vs. "call-id"), field name aliases, etc. The greatest example of grammatists' defeat was RFC822 which had got NONE fully correct implementation among widespreaded ones. But this didn't give them any experience. -- Valentin Nechayev PortaOne Inc., Software Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
