On 21 December 2011 17:14, Tarun2 Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > Refer RFC 3261, Section 7.3.1 > > Each of the following blocks is valid but not equivalent to the > others: > > Route: <sip:[email protected]> > Route: <sip:[email protected]> > Route: <sip:[email protected]> > > Route: <sip:[email protected]> > Route: <sip:[email protected]> > Route: <sip:[email protected]> > > Route: <sip:[email protected]>,<sip:[email protected]>, > <sip:[email protected]> > > .. > .. > > Even though an arbitrary number of parameter pairs may be attached to > a header field value, any given parameter-name MUST NOT appear more > than once. > > IMO, 2 RRs are valid, however 2 lr's are not. However, from implementation > perspective, you can chose to ignore the duplicate parameter value.
From my perspective I would like to remove on of the lr's. > > Regards, > Tarun Gupta > Aricent > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
