Hi, in case you've read my bug report concerning draft-ietf-sip-gruu-15 from this morning, the short version: draft-ietf-sip-outbound-16 is affected by the same problem.
The complete version: draft-ietf-sip-outbound-16 contains (amongst others) these ABNF rules: | contact-params =/ c-p-reg / c-p-instance | c-p-instance = "+sip.instance" EQUAL | LDQUOT "<" instance-val ">" RDQUOT which, when adding them to the grammar from RFC 3261, would produce from <Contact> a language that's a superset of the language that would be produced by <Contact> from RFC 3261-only. In particular, the language produced by <foo> is a subset of the "outbound extended" language, but not of the RFC 3261-only one: | foo = "m: <sip:[email protected]>;+sip.instance=" DQUOTE "x" DQUOTE SP CRLF To put it in more practical terms: the <RDQUOT> in <c-p-instance> allows for trailing <LWS>, which <contact-extension> does not, so an implementation conforming to draft-ietf-sip-outbound-16 could produce a Contact header that potentially could not be parsable (except as an <extension-header>) by an implementation conforming to RFC 3261. Thus, I would suggest to replace the rules quoted above by: | contact-params =/ c-p-reg / c-p-instance | c-p-instance = "+sip.instance" EQUAL | LDQUOT "<" instance-val ">" DQUOTE This produces the same language, maybe it's a more consistent replacement: | contact-params =/ c-p-reg / c-p-instance | c-p-instance = "+sip.instance" EQUAL | DQUOTE "<" instance-val ">" DQUOTE Florian _______________________________________________ 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
