Think you are confusing with the existence of a test case in JSR 289 (SIP Servlet API 1.1) with something else. The Allow header is a means to indicate to the far end what methods you are capable of handling. The test in JSR 289 is simply validating the capability of JSR 289 compliant implementation to send/receive 'generic' SIP requests/responses. Thus should a need arise for an application developer to define 'proprietary' headers for whatever reason or a new header is proposed in the SIPPING/SIP WG, the application developer is not 'stuck' waiting for a software update from the Servlet Container vendor they chose to package their offering. Thanks, Venkatesh
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Somesh S. Shanbhag <[email protected] > wrote: > Thats with *Allow* header. According to RFC 3261, > > 20.5 Allow > > The Allow header field lists the set of methods supported by the UA > generating the message. > > All methods, including ACK and CANCEL, understood by the UA MUST be > included in the list of methods in the Allow header field, when > present. The absence of an Allow header field MUST NOT be > interpreted to mean that the UA sending the message supports no > methods. Rather, it implies that the UA is not providing any > information on what methods it supports. > > Supplying an Allow header field in responses to methods other than > OPTIONS reduces the number of messages needed. > > Example: > > Allow: INVITE, ACK, OPTIONS, CANCEL, BYE > > Somesh > > > * Please do not take print out of this e-mail unless its absolutely > necessary *- Show quoted text - > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] on behalf of > Venkatesh > Sent: Tue 3/3/2009 12:34 PM > To: Venkatesh > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Regarding custom messages > > To add to my statements how else would you ensure your container is > capable of sending/receiving generic requests?!?! > > Sent from Venky's iPhone > > On Mar 2, 2009, at 11:00 PM, Venkatesh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I think you are missing the whole point of the test. Like dale > > mentions one can in theory define any method name. All the test is > > trying to do is to ensure that the container is capable of > > generating an arbitary request. Not sure I understand your concern > > with the same. > > > > Thanks, > > Venkatesh > > > > Sent from Venky's iPhone > > > > On Mar 2, 2009, at 8:08 PM, NarayanaSwamy <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I understand that this is a guideline/practice we could follow to > >> support a > >> custom-message. > >> How about handling an unknown message (say XYZ)? > >> > >> In the TCK (for JSR289) one of the test is sending an unknown > >> message. Is it > >> okay to expect the SIP element handle this unknown message? > >> > >> NarayanaSwamy A. > >> --- > >> --- > >> --- > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> --------------------------------------------------------- > >> This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from > >> HUAWEI, which > >> is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed > >> above. Any > >> use of the > >> information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited > >> to, > >> total or partial > >> disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the > >> intended > >> recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, > >> please > >> notify the sender by > >> phone or email immediately and delete it! > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Dale Worley [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 2:35 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > >> [email protected]; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Regarding custom messages > >> > >> On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 17:56 +0530, NarayanaSwamy wrote: > >>> HI All, > >>> > >>> As per RFC 3261 > >>> Request-Line = Method SP Request-URI SP SIP-Version CRLF > >>> > >>> Method: This specification defines six methods: REGISTER for > >>> registering contact information, INVITE, ACK, and CANCEL for setting > >>> up sessions, BYE for terminating sessions, and OPTIONS for querying > >>> servers about their capabilities. SIP extensions, documented in > >>> standards track RFCs, may define additional methods. > >>> > >>> > >>> Can anyone pls tell me which RFC defines custom methods in the > >>> request > >>> URI to be supported by sip elements. > >> > >> If a method was defined in an RFC, it would not be "custom"! > >> > >> However, there are conventions for "custom", "private", or > >> "extension" > >> identifiers that are used in many IETF protocols: > >> > >> If you want to define an identifier for your own experimental use, > >> start it > >> with "X", then a word that is your project's name, your company's > >> name, or > >> even your own name, to provide some "scoping" for the extension, > >> such as > >> "NORTEL", and then another word which identifies the extension. > >> This gives > >> results like: > >> > >> X-NORTEL-RULETEST1 sip:[email protected]:5060 SIP/2.0 > >> CSeq: 1 RULETEST1 > >> > >> If your extension becomes popular enough that multiple projects use > >> it in a > >> consistent way, change the name to remove the project-name part: > >> > >> X-RULETEST1 sip:[email protected]:5060 SIP/2.0 > >> CSeq: 1 RULETEST1 > >> > >> This convention can be applied to other element names in protocols. > >> > >> Dale > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > ------------------------------ > EMAIL DISCLAIMER : This email and any files transmitted with it are > confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to > whom they are addressed. Any unauthorised distribution or copying is > strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmission in error, please > notify the sender by reply email and then destroy the message. Opinions, > conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to > official business of Mascon shall be understood to be neither given nor > endorsed by Mascon. Any information contained in this email, when addressed > to Mascon clients is subject to the terms and conditions in governing client > contract. > > Whilst Mascon takes steps to prevent the transmission of viruses via > e-mail, we can not guarantee that any email or attachment is free from > computer viruses and you are strongly advised to undertake your own > anti-virus precautions. Mascon grants no warranties regarding performance, > use or quality of any e-mail or attachment and undertakes no liability for > loss or damage, howsoever caused. > > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
