Dale Worley wrote:
> Looking at 3261 and 2543, I think the point is that in 2543, both from-
> and to-tags are optional, but people rapidly learned that the UAS needs
> to provide a to-tag to allow forking to be handled correctly.
>
> So I think the "compatibility with 2543" point is that the from-tag may
> be missing, but that to-tag processing will be as we expect from 3261.
>
>> if we don't find a from tag in a request, can we just compare the
>> whole from field instead?
>
> That seems to be the correct thing to do.
>
Right, I understand.. I will implement it as:
if [ first_cseq == second_cesq ]
then
if [ first_to_tag == second_to_tag
|| first_to_tag.isNull # <-- Support for matching dialog forming
|| second_to_tag.isNull ] # <-- requests with the correct dialog
then
if [ first_from_tag.isNull
&& second_from_tag.isNull ]
then
if [ RFC 2543 : COMPARE THE ENTIRE FROM FIELD ]
then
DIALOG_MATCH = TRUE;
fi
else if [ first_from_tag == second_from_tag ]
then
DIALOG_MATCH = TRUE;
fi
fi
fi
Arjun
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
