In the meeting, the issue of the error code to be used when the wrong
URI is
used in a request-URI (i.e., sip instead of sips, or vice-versa) came
up.

The status quo is 2 new error codes (418 and 419). Another proposal was
to use only one
(i.e., 418 with 2 new headers).

That proposal did not seem to get much traction. And people were not
very with the
status quo either. 

Another proposal was to use 480 (Temporarily Unavailable) and NOT to use
an explicit
indication of the required/supported URIs (SIP, SIPS, etc.). Of course,
one can always
put text in the reason phrase to describe the error for displaying to
the end-use.

After talking to all the individual who seemed to have strong opinions
on this topic,
it appears that the 480 approach is the preferred approach. 

Please let the list know if you are strongly opposed to this outcome,
along with the 
reasons behind your opposition.

This is the last remaining issue to be closed in the draft, as a result
of WGLC.


_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to