Brett,
Thank you for your answer, but it is still rather clear—likely to my
feeble intellect—how to apply this to my question about use of Diversion
to pass state.
On 11/04/2016 07:04 AM, Brett Tate wrote:
As far as I can tell from the RFC 3261 ABNF, it is
permitted to put SEMI and EQUAL in the username of
a URI, but it has no semantic validity.
The user-parameter can help. However, be aware that some vendors add
"user=phone" when user portion is absent or otherwise cannot be decoded as
telephone-subscriber.
RFC 3261 section 19.1.1:
"If the user string contains a
telephone number formatted as a telephone-subscriber, the user
parameter value "phone" SHOULD be present. Even without this
parameter, recipients of SIP and SIPS URIs MAY interpret the
pre-@ part as a telephone number if local restrictions on the
name space for user name allow it."
Concerning your RFC 4694 example, see RFC 3261 section 19.1.6 concerning
how to convert a tel URL into SIP URI.
So, how does that work? Is the voodoo that gives
username-embedded parameters meaning embedded
somehow in the complex rules governing the conversion
of 'tel:' scheme URIs to 'sip:'? Or am I mistaken in
my assumption that parameters cannot be embedded in
the user part of a URI to begin with?
The "user=phone" can be added to avoid the ambiguity.
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
Tel: +1-706-510-6800 (direct) / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free)
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
