Hi Basu, Yes, PVNI header must needed to be validated by Anchoring node. For LTE., eNode or for WIFI AP/elec must validate PVNI header if it same which is assigned to user during boot process.
Thanks, Amar Sent from my iPhone > On 10-Feb-2016, at 10:47 am, ankur bansal <abh.an...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Basu > > PANI header coming from UA will be having all information in this header > from the access network where UA has latched to during bootup and got IP > connectivity .So PANI header is most specific to UA rather than any proxy > or AS. > > Now whether AS should consider PANI or not depends upon if AS local policy > found it inside/outside trusted domain. > But this decision should not be based on values preConfigured matching or > not on AS nodes. > > Thanks & regards > Ankur Bansal > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Basu Chikkalli <basu.chikka...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Does P-Access-Network-Info Header received in INVITE should be validated? >> >> RFC-7315: >> >> P-Access-Network-Info = "P-Access-Network-Info" HCOLON >> access-net-spec *(COMMA access-net-spec) >> access-net-spec = (access-type / access-class) >> >> >> >> Should we consider P-Access-Network-Info Header only if >> access-type/access-class matches with predefined Node's (IMS AS) ones. >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Basaw >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
