Hi Brett, Yes, with SIP ID, I was referring to no User part in the Request URI.
Thanks for redirecting me to the RFC3842 thread. I got my answer from that thread. Thanks, Mohit Soni Quoting "Brett Tate" <[email protected]>: >> Is the SUBSCRIBE message without SIP ID in Request URI valid? >> >> Actually, i have encountered with a SIP UA which sends SUBSCRIBE for >> Voice Mail notifications where it sends only IP Address in the Request >> URI and not sending the SIP ID for which it requires notifications. >> >> Is such SUBSCRIBE valid? > > I'm not sure what you mean by "SIP ID". > > If you are referring to no user portion within a SIP-URI, it is > valid. However, it might not produce the result they were > expecting. The following thread discusses some RFC 3842 ambiguity > concerning looking at To header's URI. > > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/sip-implementors/2009-April/022446.html > > > If you are referring to no URI scheme, it is not valid. > > Request-URI = SIP-URI / SIPS-URI / absoluteURI > > absoluteURI = scheme ":" ( hier-part / opaque-part ) > > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
