I agree that the RFC is unclear. I think that all that is need is a sentence 
that says that if there are no bindings, then the 200-OK does not contain a 
Contact header.

Virtually every implementation that I have seen in the last 8 years does it 
this way (i.e. 200-OK without any Contact).

Cheers,
(-:bob

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Iñaki Baz 
Castillo
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:50 AM
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Doubt on inclussion of Contact header in 200 OK 
to deregistration

2009/5/5 Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]>:
>
> Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>
>> Please Bob, read the *oficially* reported bug about this subject which
>> had a long discussion some time ago:
>>  http://bugs.sipit.net/show_bug.cgi?id=775


> I agree with Bob that there is no bug. Its how you parse the English that
> matters.

Paul, I think that the bug is the ambiguity in the specification. You
understand some thing, while others understand a different meaning.
IMHO there *is* a bug.


> IMO this is preferred to an alternative approach, which would also conform
> to the current text - include a Contact header with the Contact in the
> request, with an expires=0 parameter on it. I think I have heard of that
> being done by some implementations, and it confuses some other
> implementations, though they ought to be tolerant of it.

An UA can send a REGISTER with no "Contact" header in order to get the
locations for its AoR. This REGISTER *doesn't* contain "Contact"
headers.
If this AoR is not registered, the how to compose the "200 OK"? The
REGISTER has no "Contact" so your suggestion above fails.


Best regards.



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to