On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2011/5/31 Brez Borland <[email protected]>: > > Looking at the issue at hand, Iñaki brings me this concern. What if > request > > is injected with the number of Route headers pointing to the local > > elemen(s)t? How to validate that? rfc3261 is talking about loop detection > in > > regards to the Via headers, not Route. > > That's the point. I don't want my proxy doing useless loops just > because an ugly client has included more than N pre-loaded Routes > pointing to the proxy itself. > > In my proxy, I've implemented that the loose-route mechanism removes > all the Route headers pointing to the proxy (from top-to-bottom) until > it finds a Route not pointing to the proxy. In my tests it works and > breaks nothing. > > That is a plausible approach indeed. I would love to see somebody to contradict that by pointing to the document mandating the opposite. Otherwise, IMHO that is a clear 'hole' in the SIP specification that's been overlooked. Regards, Brez > Regards. > > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > <[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
