Hi Vijay, I think you're seeing a problem with the email being formatted. Adam originally had no space between Remote-Party-ID display-name and addr-spec.
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vijay S Nair Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 12:01 PM To: Worley, Dale R (Dale) Cc: Roopa Bharathan (robharat); [email protected] Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Valid Remote Party ID? Hi, Generally the parser assumes that the value of the header is till CRLF ("\r\n"). In this case, the Remote-Party-ID header contains a CRLF in between the display name and the rest of the header value. 1. Is the header should be dropped? 2. If not, is the header value should be the display name? Correct me if i am wrong? Thanks, Vijay S Nair On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) <[email protected]>wrote: > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] [ > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam > Frankel [[email protected]] > > Remote-Party-ID: "CISCO SYSTEMS " > <sip:[email protected]:5060>;privacy=off > P-Asserted-Identity: <sip:+1919392#[email protected]:5060> > > Notice after the "CISCO SYSTEMS " there are two space before the <sip > > The BNF doesn't seem clear on if the spacing is significant: > > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/50/I-D/sip-privacy-01.txt > > Remote-Party-ID = "Remote-Party-ID" ":" [display-name] > "<" addr-spec">" *(";" rpi-token) > > > Can anyone comment if this is correct Remote-Party-ID syntax or if > only a single space should be allowed? (which our app is expecting) > _______________________________________________ > > If you look at the ABNF in draft-ietf-sip-privacy-00 you will see that > there should be *no* space between "display-name" and "<", because > display-name ends with DQUOTE and the ABNF specifies display-name must > be immediately followed by "<". (display-name is from RFC 3261, > DQUOTE is inherited from RFC 2234 via 3261.) > > Indeed, the ABNF in draft-ietf-sip-privacy-00 is *terrible*. Compare > the ABNF you quote above to a similar definition from 3261: > > Contact = ("Contact" / "m" ) HCOLON > ( STAR / (contact-param *(COMMA contact-param))) > contact-param = (name-addr / addr-spec) *(SEMI contact-params) > name-addr = [ display-name ] LAQUOT addr-spec RAQUOT > > The use of HCOLON, SEMI, LAQUOT, and RAQUOT allows whitespace to be > inserted in the expected locations. Assuming that Remote-Party-ID > wants the <...> to be mandatory, the ABNF should be: > > Remote-Party-ID = "Remote-Party-ID" HCOLON [display-name] > LAQUOT addr-spec RAQUOT *(SEMI > rpi-token) > > In your position, I would parse the Remote-Party-ID header as if it > was defined as I have just given, because that is what people will > *expect* the definition to be, even if they don't correct the I-D that defines it. > > Dale > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > -- Thanks & Regards Vijay Sukumaran Nair. _______________________________________________ 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
