IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sip] comments on draft-gurbani-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-00

Dale.Worley@comcast.net Wed, 05 December 2007 04:24 UTC

Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Izloa-0002to-O3; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:24:52 -0500
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IzloZ-0002tj-Rj for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:24:51 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzloZ-0002tY-HR for sip@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:24:51 -0500
Received: from qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.16]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzloZ-0000x8-2f for sip@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:24:51 -0500
Received: from OMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.51]) by QMTA01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id LkDX1Y00416AWCU0A0rz00; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:24:55 +0000
Received: from dragon.ariadne.com ([24.34.79.42]) by OMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id LsQt1Y0050umElk0800000; Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:24:55 +0000
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=A1HwzCXZ3jIae6VPkOIA:9 a=tUX-LGfTrX8AbnLfDNEA:7 a=g848E745CBLMJAkbmATfL7f6viIA:4 a=TZm1MNU2oDwA:10 a=8y7tGHue6YMA:10
Received: from dragon.ariadne.com (dragon.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.ariadne.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id lB54OmTc016488 for <sip@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 23:24:48 -0500
Received: (from worley@localhost) by dragon.ariadne.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id lB54OmtH016484; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 23:24:48 -0500
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:24:48 -0500
Message-Id: <200712050424.lB54OmtH016484@dragon.ariadne.com>
To: sip@ietf.org
From: Dale.Worley@comcast.net
In-reply-to: <BBE61D1553D8A34F812FF87377B2935F01EE0F04@ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc> (brett@broadsoft.com)
Subject: Re: [Sip] comments on draft-gurbani-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-00
References: <BBE61D1553D8A34F812FF87377B2935F01EE0F04@ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

   From: "Brett Tate" <brett@broadsoft.com>

   However concerning things
   like To/From sip-uri's host, I assume that there will currently be poor
   interoperability if devices adjust things per section 2.2's flexibility
   (beyond hex case) within a transaction or dialog.

To and From headers shouldn't be a problem because applications really
shouldn't be comparing them; they should be treated as comments.
IIRC, there is some circumstance during registration where URI
equivalence is important, though.

   I haven't received any feedback concerning impacts of section 2.5.5.
   However I assume that they should not be considered equivalent to their
   IPv4 addresses from a SIP perspective.  And other IPv6 addresses are
   also not equivalent to their IPv4 counterpart; for instance "::1" does
   not equal "127.0.0.1".

That makes sense to me.

Dale


_______________________________________________
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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email