Juha Heinanen wrote:
Francois Audet writes:
> I looks like we are about ready to close on the 2 remaining opened
> issues in Appendix C of draft-ietf-sip-sips-03.
how about the r-r tls transport issue that was raised a couple of days
ago? someone said that according to your i-d, my proxy that uses tls
with then next proxy, has to upgrade sip: to sips: over that link.
if that is true, your draft is badly broken, because my proxy cannot
have any knowledge that sips: is supported on the following hops. if
that is not true, tell me what kind of r-r(s) my proxy needs to in that
case insert.
Yes, actually, on my side, I did not answer your last remark because I
think this is NOT related to "double RR" versus "R-R rewriting" question.
You can choose to either double R-R or rewrite, but the question you are
raising is: are you allowed to continue to use "transport=TLS" or not,
this more a question related to sip/sips clarification: currently this
is clearly stated in sip/sips that TLS transport parameter should not be
used...
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
