Session Initiation Protocol Discussion Archive - Date Index

• Mar 13 2002
• RE: [Sip] SIP MIB Work Plan, jmaeng
• Re: [Sip] SIP WG Agenda, IETF 53, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] To tag with 16.6 Request Forwarding, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] SIP MIB Work Plan, Kevin Lingle
• Re: [Sip] SIP MIB Work Plan, Allison Mankin
• RE: [Sip] SIP MIB Work Plan, Jean-Francois Mule
• Mar 12 2002
• Re:[Sip] SIP MIB Work Plan, Kevin Lingle
• LC comment on update-01, was Re: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, William Marshall
• Re: [Sip] Why UAS can`t start a second offer before the session is complete??, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Why UAS can`t start a second offer before the session is complete??, Ranjit Avasarala
• Re: [Sip] Why UAS can`t start a second offer before the session is complete??, Gonzalo Camarillo
• [Sip] SIP ABNF Grammar bugs?, Hall Bill-P26432
• RE: [Sip] Status of REFER, Alan Johnston
• [Sip] SIP DNS usage issues (draft-ietf-sip-srv-06), ssundaragopalan
• [Sip] Status of REFER, Robert Sparks
• Re: [Sip-implementors] Re: [Sip] Line folding of Sip Headers, Pramod Vishnu Patil
• RE: [Sip] Behaviour of a UAC on timeout, hisham . khartabil
• [Sip] Behaviour of a UAC on timeout, hisham . khartabil
• Re: [Sip] WGLC for Manyfolks draft, Juan-Carlos . Rojas
• [Sip] Why UAS can`t start a second offer before the session is complete??, Peili Xu
• Mar 11 2002
• Re: [Sip] Definition of WSP, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Definition of WSP, Jinyan Su
• RE: [Sip] WGLC for Manyfolks draft, Alan O'Neill
• Re: [Sip] Replaces and 481, Robert Sparks
• [Sip] Replaces and 481, Alan Johnston
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• [Sip] WGLC for Manyfolks draft, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Line folding of Sip Headers, mgovind
• Re: [Sip] Line folding of Sip Headers, Tom_Gray
• [Sip] Line folding of Sip Headers, mgovind
• [Sip] Re: Reason draft WG item?, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Mar 10 2002
• [Sip] WGLC for Update draft, Dean Willis
• [Sip] WGLC for Privacy Draft, Dean Willis
• [Sip] WGLC for Informational Draft on Media Authorization, Dean Willis
• No Subject, No Author
• [Sip] To tag with 16.6 Request Forwarding, Ofir Arkin
• [Sip] Re: Reason draft WG item?, Dean Willis
• Mar 09 2002
• [Sip] 200 UPDATE race condition, Christer Holmberg
• Mar 08 2002
• [Sip] Reason draft WG item?, Gonzalo Camarillo
• [Sip] Change in List Policy, Rosen, Brian
• Re: [Sip] URI and URL, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] == Feel & Look 10 Years Younger in 10 Weeks With HGH == 33161186544333222221111, libertyHGH331611
• RE: [Sip] URI and URL, Lawrence Conroy
• [Sip] SIP MIB Work Plan, Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] URI and URL, Sean Olson
• RE: [Sip] URI and URL, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• Re: [Sip] URI and URL, Sean Olson
• [Sip] URI and URL, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• [Sip] Re: Clarification regarding the resolution for bug #113(Overlappingtransactions), Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Juha Heinanen
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-update-01.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-manyfolks-resource-05.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-guidelines-04.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] Clarification regarding the resolution for bug #113 (Overlappingtransactions), stoshniwal
• Re: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] Question, SIP SIP
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, Gonzalo Camarillo
• [SIP] maddr in Via and Request-URI meaning, kimjuna
• Re: [Sip] SDP in unreliable 18x, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Mar 07 2002
• RE: [Sip] Question about differentiation between Strict-Routing and Loose Routing, Robert Sparks
• [Sip] [±¤°í] À̸ÞÀÏ È«º¸ ¸¶ÄÉÆÿ¡ °ü½ÉÀÖÀ¸½ÅºÐ¸¸ º¸¼¼¿ä!!! ±×·¸Áö ¾ÊÀ¸¸é ¹ö¸®¼¼¿ä., ¸ÞÀϸ¶ÄÉÆÃ
• [Sip] Protocol Action: SIP: Session Initiation Protocol to ProposedStandard, The IESG
• [Sip] SIP Success, Allison Mankin
• RE: [Sip] Question about differentiation between Strict-Routing and Loose Routing, Rosen, Brian
• [Sip] Question about differentiation between Strict-Routing and Loose Routing, Ofir Arkin
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Michael Thomas
• [Sip] Question, Prabhas Sinha
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Juha Heinanen
• [Sip] Glare with PRACK vs. UPDATE. Was: Question on manyfolks 05, William Marshall
• RE: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• Re: [Sip] draft-antti-rfc2806bis-02.txt, Henning Schulzrinne
• Re: [Sip] Comments on Resource Priority Header, Mpierce1
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-privacy-04.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-call-auth-04.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-dhcp-06.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] [±¤°í] 10¸¸¿øÀ¸·Î 600¸¸À̸ÞÀÏ+¹ß¼Û±â¸¦ ³»Ç°¾È¿¡..^^;, È«º¸ÆÀ
• RE: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, krisztian . kiss
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, James Undery
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, jh
• Re: [Sip] SDP in unreliable 18x, Christer Holmberg
• [Sip] draft-antti-rfc2806bis-02.txt, mgovind
• Mar 06 2002
• Re: [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] SDP in unreliable 18x, Bob Penfield
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, George Foti (LMC)
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Henry Sinnreich
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Rohan Mahy
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Rohan Mahy
• Re: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, jh
• [Sip] SDP in unreliable 18x, Christer Holmberg
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, George Foti (LMC)
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-message-01.txt, Internet-Drafts
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, David R. Oran
• [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, James Undery
• RE: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Mark Watson
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mark Watson
• AW: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• [Sip] Path header vs. pre-loaded route in Contact, Rohan Mahy
• RE: [Sip] Some bis-09 findings, Alexandre Charest
• RE: [Sip] Some bis-09 findings, bernhard . honeisen
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Michael Thomas
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• AW: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mayer Georg
• Re: [Sip] Some bis-09 findings, Christer Holmberg
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-yu-tel-url-04.txt, Internet-Drafts
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Michael Thomas
• [Sip] Some bis-09 findings, bernhard . honeisen
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Michael Thomas
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• RE: [Sip] Questions to draft-undery-sip-auth-00.txt, Steffen Fries
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Michael Thomas
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mark Watson
• AW: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-events-05.txt, Internet-Drafts
• AW: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mayer Georg
• [Sip] Question on manyfolks 05, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• [Sip] To tag question, Christer Holmberg
• RE: [Sip] Questions to draft-undery-sip-auth-00.txt, James Undery
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• [Sip] Questions to draft-undery-sip-auth-00.txt, Steffen Fries
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Stephen Terrill (ERA)
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Michael Thomas
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• Mar 05 2002
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Christian Huitema
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] UPDATE Method & Glare, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Jonathan Lennox
• Re: [Sip] UPDATE Method & Glare, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: [Sip] RE: [Sip] [? ?] ?????? ???? ?????, Rosen, Brian
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] CSeq and Via branch in bis-09, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Sean Olson
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Sean Olson
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] RE: [Sip] [? ?] ?????? ???? ?????, James M. Polk
• Re: [Sip] re: Path as WG item, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Clarification relating to the Path header usage., Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mark Watson
• RE: [Sip] RE: [Sip] [? ?] ?????? ???? ?????, Christian Huitema
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• RE: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, Flemming Andreasen
• [Sip] CSeq and Via branch in bis-09, hisham . khartabil
• RE: [Sip] Removing security preconditions from manyfolks, Peterson, Jon
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• [Sip] Questions/Comments on privacy-04 draft, George Foti (LMC)
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mark Watson
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mark Watson
• Re: [Sip] Offer/answer model, Bob Penfield
• RE: [Sip] RE: [Sip] [? ?] ?????? ???? ?????, Rosen, Brian
• [Sip] Offer/answer model, Salva Rey Calatayud
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] PRACK question: draft-ietf-sip-100rel-06, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] Comments on Resource Priority Header, James M. Polk
• No Subject, No Author
• Re: [Sip] T4, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Comments on Resource Priority Header, Henning Schulzrinne
• Re: [Sip] (no subject), James M. Polk
• Mar 04 2002
• Re: [Sip] re: Path as WG item, James M. Polk
• [Sip] RE: [Sip] [광 고] 해외교포들의 한국식품 종합쇼핑몰, Hussam Jarada
• [Sip] [±¤ °í] Çؿܱ³Æ÷µéÀÇ Çѱ¹½ÄÇ° Á¾ÇÕ¼îÇθô, HanBay
• RE: [Sip] Expires in 2xx response to SUBSCRIBE (Events-04), Adam Roach
• [Sip] Clarification relating to the Path header usage., stoshniwal
• RE: [Sip] Question on Events-04 draft, Adam Roach
• Re: [Sip] Comments on Resource Priority Header, Mpierce1
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] PRACK question: draft-ietf-sip-100rel-06, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] PRACK question: draft-ietf-sip-100rel-06, Gonzalo Camarillo
• [Sip] PRACK question: draft-ietf-sip-100rel-06, Christer Holmberg
• [Sip] SIP DNS usage issues (draft-ietf-sip-srv-06), Boris Perlov
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, George Foti (LMC)
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, George Foti (LMC)
• [Sip] ¡ß Á˼ÛÇÕ´Ï´Ù. ¹Î°£ºñ¹æ ÀÚ·á[±¤°í], °Ç°­ÁöÅ´ÀÌ
• RE: [Sip] T4, Fuxbruner, Amihay
• RE: [Sip] Expires in 2xx response to SUBSCRIBE (Events-04), hisham . khartabil
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] Removing security preconditions from manyfolks, David R. Oran
• RE: [Sip] Path header: Independent operation in each direction, or common o peration for both directions, David R. Oran
• Mar 03 2002
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• [Sip] WG adoption of Update method, Dean Willis
• RE:Dialog Tunnelling == bad (Was: [SIP] Event ID), Michael Purcell
• [Sip] (no subject), SIP SIP
• [Sip] Question bis 07: "response retransmissions" for none-INVITE transaction, Fuxbruner, Amihay
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, SIP SIP
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, SIP SIP
• [Sip] Question on Events-04 draft, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Consensus poll on draft-ietf-sip-privacy-04.txt, Chris Martin
• Mar 02 2002
• [Sip] Consensus poll on draft-ietf-sip-privacy-04.txt, Rohan Mahy
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Dean Willis
• [Sip] re: Path as WG item, Rohan Mahy
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, George Foti (LMC)
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• RE: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, George Foti (LMC)
• [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, jh
• Re: [Sip] Comments on Resource Priority Header, Henning Schulzrinne
• Re: [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Mart Nurmet
• Mar 01 2002
• [Sip] Path to Working Group Item, Rosen, Brian
• [Sip] (no subject), Rohan Mahy
• [Sip] Manyfolks 05, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Path header: Independent operation in each direction, or common o peration for both directions, George Foti (LMC)
• RE: Home Extension Service was Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Henry Sinnreich
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Tan Ya-Ching ICM N PG U ID A 1
• RE: Home Extension Service was Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Tom_Gray
• RE: Home Extension Service was Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Alan Johnston
• Home Extension Service was Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Tom_Gray
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-09.txt,.ps,.pdf, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-srv-06.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-events-04.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-100rel-06.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-manyfolks-resource-04.txt, Internet-Drafts
• RE: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, hisham . khartabil
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Ofir Arkin
• [Sip] [±¤°í]¿©·¯ºÐÀÇ ÀÒ¾î¹ö¸° ÇູÀÇ º¹±îÁö ã¾Æµå¸³´Ï´Ù., ¿î»ê
• [Sip] [±¤°í]¿±±âÀü¹® ¼îÇθô, ¿±±â¼¥
• Feb 28 2002
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Ofir Arkin
• Re: [Sip] UPDATE versus (re)INVITE, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] UPDATE versus (re)INVITE, Cullen Jennings
• [Sip] RE:, Mark Watson
• [Sip] (no subject), Rohan Mahy
• RE: [Sip] UPDATE Method & Glare, Mark Watson
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] NOTIFY behaviour, Bob Penfield
• [Sip] Section 5.2 of manyfolks, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Ofir Arkin
• Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Bob Penfield
• [Sip] RE: NOTIFY behaviour, William Marshall
• [Sip] RE: NOTIFY behaviour, Adam Roach
• RE: [Simple] RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-events-04; Questions, Adam Roach
• Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Question regarding event-04, Adam Roach
• Re: [Sip] T4, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] NOTIFY behaviour, hisham . khartabil
• Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Prabhas Sinha
• Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Mark Taylor
• [Sip] RE: Remote-Party-Id extensibility, Mark Watson
• Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Bob Penfield
• Re: [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Christer Holmberg
• [Sip] Multiple 200 OKs for an INVITE, Ofir Arkin
• [Sip] Question regarding event-04, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• [Sip] Expires in 2xx response to SUBSCRIBE (Events-04), hisham . khartabil
• RE: [Sip] Irrelevant nit on call-id and IPs, Tan Ya-Ching ICM N PG U ID A 1
• RE: [Sip] Irrelevant nit on call-id and IPs, Tan Ya-Ching ICM N PG U ID A 1
• [Sip] Let's discuss a change in the bis. WAS: Why Proxies are Good andB2BUAs May Not Be, thomas . nagel
• Re: [Sip] S/MIME in SIP, Jari Arkko
• RE: [Sip] S/MIME in SIP, Steffen Fries
• RE: [Sip] S/MIME in SIP, Peterson, Jon
• [Sip] S/MIME in SIP, Steffen Fries
• Re: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Chris Martin
• [Sip] (no subject), customer_service at childcareprograms.com
• [Sip] Remote-Party-Id extensibility, Flemming Andreasen
• [Sip] Irrelevant nit on call-id and IPs, Cullen Jennings
• Feb 27 2002
• [Sip] UPDATE Method & Glare, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenari o outside of 3GPP requirements), Dean Willis
• Re: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be (was Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body), Dean Willis
• [Sip] [À̺¥Æ®±¤°í]¹«·á ȸ¿ø°¡ÀÔ ÇϽøé ÇØ¿Ü ¹«·á ¿©Çà±ÇÀ» µå¸³´Ï´Ù., ¿©Çà°¡ÀÚ
• Re: [Sip] AW: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be --> NO, Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] AW: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be --> NO, Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-events-04; Questions, Chiou, Mark
• Re: [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Robert Sparks
• RE: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Sean Olson
• RE: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Jonathan Lennox
• [Sip] Question about Section 12.2 Requests within a Dialog, Ofir Arkin
• Re: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Robert Sparks
• RE: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Sean Olson
• Re: [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] bis-08 is born, Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip] New Version: draft-ietf-sip-events-04 complete, Adam Roach
• Re: [Sip] Question about section 12.2.2 bis-08, Christer Holmberg
• [Sip] Question about section 12.2.2 bis-08, Ofir Arkin
• Re: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Jonathan Lennox
• RE: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, James Undery
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenari o outside of 3GPP requirements), jh
• Re: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Robert Sparks
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenari o outside of 3GPP requirements), Mark Watson
• Re: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Jonathan Lennox
• Re: [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] bis-08 is born, Jonathan Lennox
• Re: [Sip] SIP version related statement in bis-08, Gabor Fenyes
• [Sip] SIP version related statement in bis-08, sshetti
• [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] bis-08 is born, Paul Kyzivat
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, jh
• RE: [Sip] multicast restricted to ttl=1, David R. Oran
• RE: [Sip] T4, hisham . khartabil
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: SDP in 1xx responses, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• Re: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be (was Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body), Pete Cordell
• Re: [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), jh
• Re: [Sip] a couple problems in draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-07.9, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] 491 Retry-After missing bis 07, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] bis-08 is born, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Andrew Allen
• AW: [Sip] AW: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be --> NO, thomas . nagel
• Re: [Sip] multicast restricted to ttl=1, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Bis-8: To tag question, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] T4, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Retry-After delta-seconds NIT in bis08, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Question on Unify draft, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Bis-8: merged requests, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Small bits on sip-srv, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-100rel-05.txt, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-100rel-05.txt, Christer Holmberg
• Feb 26 2002
• Re: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Dean Willis
• [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 3: "major" issues, Jonathan Lennox
• Re: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Dean Willis
• [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 2: clarifications and consistency, Jonathan Lennox
• [Sip] Draft -08 comments, part 1: editorial, Jonathan Lennox
• [Sip] [±¤°í]±¹»êijµå ijµð¾È °¡Á¤¿ë(Çлý¿ë)Ưº°º¸±Þ, Çѱ¹ÀÎÅÚ¸®¸¶ÄÉÆÃ
• Re: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, jh
• Compatibility (was: RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body), Mark Watson
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message bod y, Mark Watson
• Re: [Sip] Bis-8: To tag question, Christer Holmberg
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Christian Huitema
• RE: [Sip] Bis-8: To tag question, Jo Hornsby
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Tom_Gray
• Re: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• RE: 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Christian Huitema
• 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), jh
• Re: [Sip] UPDATE versus (re)INVITE, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] AW: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be --> NO NO NO, Dean Willis
• [Sip] Tone control for an existing dialog, Henry Chen
• Re: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be (was Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body), Dean Willis
• [Sip] AW: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be --> NO NO NO, thomas . nagel
• [Sip] UPDATE versus (re)INVITE, Gordon Ledgard
• 3GPP Arch. Why use a local proxy? (was Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements), Dean Willis
• Re: [Sip] Question on Unify draft, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] CANCEL and 100 Trying Question, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] CANCEL and 100 Trying Question, Robert Sparks
• RE: [Sip] bis-08 11.2 Processing of OPTIONS Request, Alan Johnston
• Re: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] 10.3 Processing REGISTER requests, hisham . khartabil
• Re: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] bis-08 11.2 Processing of OPTIONS Request, Sloan, Rob
• [Sip] 10.3 Processing REGISTER requests, Ofir Arkin
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• No Subject, No Author
• [Sip] Question on Unify draft, Chen, Xin (Xin)
• RE: [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Tan Ya-Ching ICM N PG U ID A 1
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• No Subject, No Author
• Re: [Sip] CANCEL and 100 Trying Question, Ofir Arkin
• RE: [Sip] CANCEL and 100 Trying Question, hisham . khartabil
• [Sip] CANCEL and 100 Trying Question, Fuxbruner, Amihay
• [Sip] Bis-8: merged requests, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] Bis-8: To tag question, Christer Holmberg
• Re: Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be (was Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxiesare not allowed to modify message body), Juan-Carlos . Rojas
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Peterson, Jon
• [Sip] Retry-After delta-seconds NIT in bis08, coreygates
• Re: [Sip] bis08 - telephone-subscriber in rfc2806 and escaped characters, mgovind
• [Sip] Manyfolks version 04, Gonzalo Camarillo
• RE: [Sip] Bis-8: To tag question, Jo Hornsby
• RE: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements, Christian Huitema
• Feb 25 2002
• Re: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements, Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] Removing security preconditions from manyfolks, Peterson, Jon
• RE: [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements, Christian Huitema
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Adam Roach
• [Sip] Path scenario outside of 3GPP requirements, Dean Willis
• Why Proxies are Good and B2BUAs May Not Be (was Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body), Dean Willis
• RE: [Sip] Query: Adopt draft-willis-sip-path-xx as WG doc?, jh
• RE: [Sip] Query: Adopt draft-willis-sip-path-xx as WG doc?, bernhard . honeisen
• RE: [Sip] Query: Adopt draft-willis-sip-path-xx as WG doc?, jh
• RE: [Sip] Query: Adopt draft-willis-sip-path-xx as WG doc?, bernhard . honeisen
• [Sip] bis08 - telephone-subscriber in rfc2806 and escaped characters, JF Rey
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-camarillo-sip-sigcomp-00.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] Path header: Independent operation in each direction, or common operation for both directions, jh
• RE: [Sip] Query: Adopt draft-willis-sip-path-xx as WG doc?, jh
• [Sip] Path header: Independent operation in each direction, or common operation for both directions, Drage, Keith (Keith)
• RE: [Sip] Query: Adopt draft-willis-sip-path-xx as WG doc?, Drage, Keith (Keith)
• [Sip] T4, hisham . khartabil
• Re: [Sip] Removing security preconditions from manyfolks, Flemming Andreasen
• [Sip] sip-request at ietf.org, 조중근
• Feb 24 2002
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Gonzalo Camarillo
• [Sip] [ÄÚµðÁ¤º¸] "7cm Ä¿Áø Å°"¿Í "Shark ÀðÅ© È÷Ʋ·¯°¡¹æ", Á¤¸» ¸ÚÁ®¿ä! »õÇб⿣ »õ·Î¿î ¸ð½ÀÀ¸·Î.. [±¤°í], ¿¹»ÛÄÚµð
• Feb 22 2002
• Re: [Sip] security preconditions, Jari Arkko
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Cullen Jennings
• Feb 22 2002
• Re: [Sip] Bis-7.9: Chapter 17.2.3, Christer Holmberg
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, George Foti (LMC)
• [Sip] security preconditions, Rohan Mahy
• [Sip] draft-ietf-sipping-cc-framework-00.txt (fwd), Rohan Mahy
• [Sip] (±¤°í)´ºÆ®¸®¼Ç Æ÷ ¶óÀÌÇÁ, ³²°¡Çö
• [Sip] SIP usage in WAP apps, Prabhas Sinha
• No Subject, No Author
• RE: [Sip] Interpretation of headers in REGISTER message, Adam Roach
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• [Sip] Interpretation of headers in REGISTER message, Tiruthani, Saravanakumar
• [Sip] Removing security preconditions from manyfolks, Gonzalo Camarillo
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Adam Roach
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• Re: [Sip] bis-80 security requirements, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Last Call: SIP: Session Initiation Protocol to ProposedStandard, The IESG
• [Sip] Drafts on SIP Telephony Devices, Henry Sinnreich
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Bob Penfield
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message bod y, Roy, Radhika R, ALASO
• RE: [Sip] multicast restricted to ttl=1, Roy, Radhika R, ALASO
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message bod y, George Foti (LMC)
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message bod y, Roy, Radhika R, ALASO
• RE: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, George Foti (LMC)
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-08.txt,.ps,.pdf, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-srv-05.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sip-100rel-05.txt, Internet-Drafts
• [Sip] bis-80 security requirements, Phil Reynolds
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Christer Holmberg
• [Sip] Bis-8: To tag question, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Pete Cordell
• Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-07.9 now available, Ofir Arkin
• [Sip] Q: SIP Encapsulation in XML?, Nagel, Thomas
• RE: [Sip] multicast restricted to ttl=1, David R. Oran
• Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-07.9 now available, Chris Martin
• [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] bis-08 is born, Paul Kyzivat
• RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-07.9 now available, Christian Huitema
• Feb 21 2002
• RE: [Sip] 200 for INFO, Jeff Van Dyke
• [Sip] REGISTER Method: How does proxy interpret the address associations, Venkatasubramanian Tiruthani
• Re: [Sip] Comments on Resource Priority Header, Mpierce1
• Re: [Sip] SMIME and active MITM attacks, Michael Thomas
• Re: [Sip] more SMIME comments, Michael Thomas
• Re: [Sip] SMIME and active MITM attacks, Jari Arkko
• Re: [Sip] more SMIME comments, Jari Arkko
• [Sip] bis-08 is born, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] bis-07.9: SDP in 1xx responses, Bob Penfield
• [Sip] Decrement Max-Forwards when acting on a 3xx, Rohan Mahy
• RE: [Sip] more SMIME comments, Michael Thomas
• RE: [Sip] SMIME and active MITM attacks, Michael Thomas
• [Sip] bis-07.9: proxies are not allowed to modify message body, Bob Penfield
• [Sip] 491 Retry-After missing bis 07, Fuxbruner, Amihay
• [Sip] updated offer/answer draft available, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-07.9 now available, Ofir Arkin
• [Sip] Bis-7.9: Chapter 17.2.3, Christer Holmberg
• Re: [Sip] SMIME and active MITM attacks, Ofir Arkin
• [Sip] Small bits on sip-srv, Brazier Lachlan
• No Subject, No Author
• RE: [Sip] SMIME and active MITM attacks, Peterson, Jon
• Re: [Sip] Some more ABNF issues - bis07, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: [Sip] more SMIME comments, Peterson, Jon
• Re: [Sip] Two more bis-07.9 BNF nits, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Another bis-07.9 BNF nit, Jonathan Rosenberg
• RE: [Sip] Questions to draft-undery-sip-auth-00.txt, James Undery
• Re: [Sip] Remaining uses of <"> in bis-07.9 BNF, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] FW: Questions on To tags (was Re: [Sipping] Comments on draft-ietf-sip-rfcbis-05.pdf), Badri Srinivasan S
• Re: [Sip] Different From tags in INVITEs, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Questions to draft-undery-sip-auth-00.txt, Steffen Fries
• [Sip] Re: Unify & offers in responses (Question on bis-07), Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] updated I-D: draft-ietf-sip-100rel-05.txt, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Different From tags in INVITEs, Badri Srinivasan S
• [Sip] sip-srv update submitted, Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] SIP - PSTN Interconnection, Jagannathan R
• [Sip] Re: Comments on SIP SRV Draft, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] Question according to draft-ietf-sip-srv-04, Jonathan Rosenberg
• Re: [Sip] comments on srv draft, Jonathan Rosenberg
• compromising on sips and finishing bis, was: Re: [Sip] bis-07.9 "sips:" additions (actually about "SIPS," not S/MIME)., Jonathan Rosenberg
• [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] updated offer/answer draft, Paul Kyzivat
• Feb 20 2002
• [Sip] comments on draft-ietf-sip-rfc2543bis-07.9, Bob Penfield