RE: [Sip] Replies to ACK

[jh@lohi.eng.song.fi]

Jiri Kuthan writes:

 > Just to be safe -- I'm not advocating ACK/replies, I'm trying to
 > understand a potential gap betweeen running code I sighted, 
 > specification and its interpretations. I simply wish to know
 > whether it is a bug or feature, which is not apparent to me
 > from the spec.

i looked every place where rfc3261 mentions ack and didn't mention
anywhere if a proxy is allowed to respond to an ack it doesn't like.  my
interpretation of rfc3261 is that an ack to 2xx response is routed
exactly like any other request, which means, for example, that if a
proxy gets such an ack that contains a request uri it doesn't for some
reason like, it is allowed to respond with, for example, 403 forbidden.

since this clearly is unclear, i would suggest that whoever keeps an bug
list on rfc3261, adds this issue there to be clarified one way or
another in the next revision.

-- juha

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip