I can't speak to this because I don't have a good sense of what the prevailing methodological winds are as far as far as how liberal SIP stacks should be. The intuitive answer from a programmer's perspective would be to drop anything that doesn't fit the grammar and throw an error if protocol mechanics permit, but on the other hand, quoting things that don't need to be quoted isn't harmful -- just semantically nullary.
On Jun 9, 2010, at 6:11 AM, Harbhanu <[email protected]> wrote: > I absolutely agree to your point, but here we need to decide its > handling > incase we get this format from network > > Would it be reasonable to ignore/drop a response *just because* the > Reason-Phrase is a quoted string? > How do other commercial or widely used stacks handles this? > > Thanks for your prompt & close to absolute reply. :) > > Regards, > Harbhanu > *** > *** > ********************************************************************** > *********** > This e-mail and 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: Alex Balashov [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 12:12 PM > To: Harbhanu > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] regarding Reason-Phrase > > > On Jun 9, 2010, at 2:10 AM, Harbhanu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> AFAIK as per the ABNF the same is not allowed, but I am at loss to >> understand the rationale behind it. > > I am at a loss to understand the rationale FOR it. The ABNF is > conservative; it takes an active rule to allow something, but merely > the passive absence of a rule to prohibit it. Why would you want to > fill the ABNF with junk like "the same?" > > The purpose of quoting or otherwise bracketing particles in grammars > has always been to characterise the quoted string as a single token to > the parser something that would, by default, be treated as a series of > multiple tokens, as would be the case here in a whitespace-delimeted > syntax. > > Since the reason phrase is the last element of the first line of a > reply, it can go on indefinitely until EOL without any additional > syntactical information. > > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
