Subject: RE: [SIP] RECORD-ROUTE/ROUTE requirements

From: "Keith Robinson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:43:20 +0000

Is it now generally agreed that the requirement in 6.43.2 for clients to set up
the Route name-addr using Contact/From headers (excluding maddr and port) should
be removed ?  This seems to be the fundamental problem.

K . Robinson

_______________________________________________
SIP mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/sip

---

From: "Jo Hornsby" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:52:22 -0000

> Is it now generally agreed that the requirement in 6.43.2 for 
> clients to set up the Route name-addr using Contact/From
> headers (excluding maddr and port) should be removed ?  This
> seems to be the fundamental problem.

I think so.

*duck and cover*

&:)

 - Jo.

---

From: Billy Biggs <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:24:18 -0600

Jo Hornsby ([email-masked]):

>> Is it now generally agreed that the requirement in 6.43.2 for clients
>> to set up the Route name-addr using Contact/From headers (excluding
>> maddr and port) should be removed ?  This seems to be the fundamental
>> problem.
> 
> I think so.

  I think so too.

  That said, I have always thought that this line was a bug: "Each such
proxy server adds the Request-URI of the _incoming_request_ to the
beginning of the list."

  s/incoming request/proxy/

-- 
Billy Biggs, 3Com               Email: [email-masked]
http://www.div8.net/billy/      Phone: [email-masked]