On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) <[email protected]> wrote: > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] > [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nikolay Kondratyev > [[email protected]] > > I know that there are many sip gurus in the list... > I encountered the registrar, that uses status 407 in reply to Register > instead of 401. > What i managed to find out in rfc 3261, is that (if i'm not mistaken) > registrar should use 401. > But what could be the consequences of this misbehaviour? > ________________________________________ > > I don't think there should be any consequences. The UA should act on a 407 > in the same way as it acts on a 401.
I think the difference is whether or not Proxy-Authenticate vs. WWW-Authenticate header is used in the response. Both are correct and can be handled by sipXbridge. > > Dale > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > -- M. Ranganathan _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
