Ooh, good point. Fair enough, I'll change that. -hadriel
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Jonathan Rosenberg > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:51 PM > To: IETF SIP List > Subject: [Sip] The problem with draft-kaplan-sip-secure-call-id-00 > > I didnt get a chance to say this at the mike. > > You *cannot* change the BNF for the call-id. If you did, you might end > up with the following problem: > > A new UA gets built, compliant to this update. It is one of these > 'aggressive parsing' UAs. It rejects any message which is not compliant > to the BNF. An older, normal RFC-3261 compliant UA sends a call-id which > includes the @-sign. > > According to the BNF of this updated 3261, and based on the strictness > of this aggressive-parsing UAs, it rejects that request as non-compliant. > > As such, you need to keep the BNF, but change the normative language > such that an endpoint MUST NOT include the [@ host] but MUST be prepared > to receive it. > > -Jonathan R. > > -- > Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 111 Wood Avenue South > Cisco Fellow Iselin, NJ 08830 > Cisco, Voice Technology Group > [email protected] > http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (408) 902-3084 > http://www.cisco.com > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www.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 _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.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
