(removing the rfc-editor and trimming the distribution to the lists) On Aug 2, 2011, at 5:24 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2011/8/2 Robert Sparks <rjspa...@nostrum.com>: >> Further, they're only going to make sense for 1xx that is sent using 100rel. > > This has been discussed in sip-implementors, and that assertion seems > incorrect. As I've reported in the errata: > > > Section 12.1: "Dialogs are created through the generation of > non-failure responses to requests with specific methods. Within this > specification, only 2xx and 101-199 responses with a To tag, where the > request was INVITE, will establish a dialog." > > Section 12.1.1: "When a UAS responds to a request with a response that > establishes a dialog (such as a 2xx to INVITE), the UAS MUST copy all > Record-Route header field values from the request into the response > [...]. The UAS MUST add a Contact header field to the response." > > So it's clear that a 1xx response to an INVITE creates a dialog and > then it MUST contain a Contact header and mirrored Record-Route > headers, *regardless* the usage of 100rel. > > Am I wrong? if so, why? Not wrong, just incomplete. This will create an (early) dialog at the UAS. It may or may not create a dialog at the UAC without 100rel since the message may never get to the UAC. Where I said "make sense" above, it might have been better if I had said "be useful". > > Regards. > > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > <i...@aliax.net> > _______________________________________________ > sipcore mailing list > sipc...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business. Use sip-implement...@cs.columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation. Use dispa...@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip. Use sipc...@ietf.org for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.