On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 12:37 -0500, Dale Worley wrote: > Generally, allowing an alternative form of anything is increasing > complexity and will cause difficulties. In this case, '+' is a > perfectly valid character for user-parts, and RFC 3261 specifies that > sip:+1...@domain is different from sip:1...@domain. > > In regard to DIDs from ITSPs, one generally wants the ingress gateway to > translate the request-URI from whatever format the ITSP provides to the > form used internally within the sipX system.
I disagree - I think that you only want to modify addresses in the call routing core (proxy/redirect servers). Spreading those changes around through a larger number of components makes debugging flows much more difficult. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
