Just to elaborate on what Brett said: To answer this question, first you check the syntax. RFC 3325 says that first parameter is 'name-addr / addr-spec' just as it is for From/To etc. The 'name-addr' form uses the <...>, and the addr-spec doesn't.
The stuff that Brett quotes below mentions a few headers, but it applies to any place that uses 'name-addr / addr-spec'. And then you need to know that user=phone is indeed a uri paramter. So the correct form for the question is: P-Asserted-Identity:<sip:[email protected];user=phone> Thanks, Paul On 6/28/12 4:05 PM, Brett Tate wrote: > RFC 3261 section 20: > > The Contact, From, and To header fields contain a URI. If the URI > contains a comma, question mark or semicolon, the URI MUST be > enclosed in angle brackets (< and>). Any URI parameters are > contained within these brackets. If the URI is not enclosed in angle > brackets, any semicolon-delimited parameters are header-parameters, > not URI parameters. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:sip- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Vivek Singla >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 3:58 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Sip-implementors] Angular brackets for P-Asserted-Identity >> >> Hi, >> >> I have a question regarding the format of the header p-asserted- >> identity. >> >> P-Asserted-Identity: sip:[email protected];user=phone >> >> P-Asserted-Identity:<sip:[email protected];user=phone> >> >> Which one of the above is correct as per specs? >> >> Please let me know where in rfc 3261 or any other to find out that both >> of them are acceptable. >> >> I'd really appreciate. >> >> Vivek. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
