Re: [Sip] E.164 - who owns it

[Sriram Parameswar <Sriram.Parameswar at microsoft.com>]

Just a quick comment on proxies that act on 302's, there is an expired draft "draft-rajesh-sipping-303" that proposed a new response that specifically allowed proxies to act on a redirect. This may be used to clarify the behavior on 302's that must go all the way back to the caller.

Thanks,

Sriram Parameswar

-----Original Message-----



Message: 1
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:58:55 -0500
From: "Francois Audet" <audet at nortel.com>
Subject: Re: [Sip] E.164 - who owns it
To: "Hadriel Kaplan" <HKaplan at acmepacket.com>,  "Dean Willis"
        <dean.willis at softarmor.com>,    "Anders Kristensen" <andersk at cisco.com>
Cc: SIP IETF <sip at ietf.org>, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat at cisco.com>, Dan
        WING <dwing at cisco.com>
Message-ID:
        <1ECE0EB50388174790F9694F77522CCF163C2716 at zrc2hxm0.corp.nortel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"

I think Hadriel is right.

As much as I agree that from a technical perspective, having 302s not
recursed on by proxies is better, I can't see this generally becoming
the norm in this SIP universe. It's too late for that.

Maybe in SIP Four Dot Oh.

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