Re: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-11: ABNF backward compatibility

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Tue, 01 October 2013 20:52 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E63211E8211 for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:52:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.162
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.162 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x387gycz7jdC for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from QMTA11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:44:76:96:59:211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C74911E8153 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.72]) by QMTA11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Xsxl1m0071ZXKqc5BwsbCc; Tue, 01 Oct 2013 20:52:35 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([50.138.229.164]) by omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Xwsb1m00J3ZTu2S3hwsbsv; Tue, 01 Oct 2013 20:52:35 +0000
Message-ID: <524B3612.7070903@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 16:52:34 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
References: <576A8B541C219D4E9CEB1DF8C19C7B881A061F01@MBX08.citservers.local> <CAHBDyN5zNiLjihMO-o96Avu7zDbm96ihfwgifvgbx28aQ1Vv7Q@mail.gmail.com> <576A8B541C219D4E9CEB1DF8C19C7B881A061FED@MBX08.citservers.local> <CAHBDyN4q=qrc8ti_MWXxwi5SPW8-zOHMz0z27krA+VtHNg3PFg@mail.gmail.com> <524B2832.9040201@alum.mit.edu> <CAHBDyN6JFwUWhzdq1iyH3NTdParjKpt7Ghs0TuJqQ0vfvYC7XQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBDyN6JFwUWhzdq1iyH3NTdParjKpt7Ghs0TuJqQ0vfvYC7XQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1380660755; bh=Cjv3WISad9zGCZT6AK0ejno4XKY5LQ7++5pTjAA4nKc=; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: Content-Type; b=Gz6TYDURCNhl8G2sFz/oI13N1lIl1dfNUnInI9vsiv9WBcwkkj4qvAsNew9C5X2Wx l8ReagYxnuwCD4oZFEI/G/SkEVF0YLEvIDf0WIQ+4IX4v5qaSa/Vd72I8HCcREdX77 TAfXUVt+DTJdmMbA6MuJ5tEXXsK2REnC0hiET8I0aR4vWFL1uE7BfWAMdeWzYUqiGC 755597Ij3WnEZS0L3JVjh7UpEymZzUPrQhgO2igABNrLIxD9TM8GV2MZP6wZ67tVdC alUL1/Utdw2m0zeg73m7qYcNTBlsyaoGKZpzK19ckPjWTuxG+DbVn2+0T1bNfWGzqr Hzo6LfTDkdryA==
Cc: SIPCORE <sipcore@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-11: ABNF backward compatibility
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 20:52:48 -0000

On 10/1/13 4:23 PM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu
> <mailto:pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:
>
>     IIUC, the change was to permit addr-spec as well as name-addr.
>     And this issue is then that a 4244 implementation won't be able to
>     parse that. Right?
>
> [MB] It's possible that some folks might be able to parse it, but we
> shouldn't count on that.[/MB]

No.

>     Please ensure that the use cases are still correct after the change.
>
> [MB] I don't think there's an issue with the call flows. [/MB]

I just looked, and I think you are right.

>              Thanks,
>              Paul
>
>
>     On 10/1/13 2:38 PM, Mary Barnes wrote:
>
>         Yes, you are correct - I misread the diffs and we did make the
>         change
>         based on Dale's comment, but we (authors) agree that it should be
>         consistent with RFC 4244.
>
>         Mary.
>
>
>         On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Brett Tate <brett@broadsoft.com
>         <mailto:brett@broadsoft.com>
>         <mailto:brett@broadsoft.com <mailto:brett@broadsoft.com>>> wrote:
>
>              Hi Mary,____
>
>              __ __
>
>
>              It looks like Dale requested the change; however, I think
>         that it
>              will cause interoperability issues with rfc4244 devices if an
>              rfc4244bis devices sends an addr-spec.  Thus I think that
>         the change
>              should be reverted (to be hi-targeted-to-uri= name-addr).____
>
>              __ __
>
>         http://www.ietf.org/mail-__archive/web/sipcore/current/__msg04158.html
>         <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg04158.html>
>         ____
>
>              __ __
>
>              Thanks,____
>
>              Brett____
>
>              __ __
>
>              *From:*Mary Barnes [mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@__gmail.com
>         <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
>              <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@__gmail.com
>         <mailto:mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>>]
>              *Sent:* Tuesday, October 01, 2013 1:41 PM
>
>
>              *To:* Brett Tate
>              *Cc:* draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis@__tools.ietf.org
>         <mailto:draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis@tools.ietf.org>
>              <mailto:draft-ietf-sipcore-__rfc4244bis@tools.ietf.org
>         <mailto:draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis@tools.ietf.org>>;
>         sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
>         <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>>
>              *Subject:* Re: [sipcore]
>         draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-__11: ABNF
>              backward compatibility____
>
>              __ __
>
>
>              I don't think it was intentional.  I backtracked and for
>         whatever
>              reason that change appeared in the individual -00 and I
>         could find
>              no email threads as to why we would have made that change.   It
>              appears Dale pointed out that issue a long time back, as
>         well, but
>              it seems we didn't make that fix. ____
>
>              __ __
>
>
>              So, that is an error and we should fix that.  We have a
>         couple other
>              editorial/clarification points that Dale has pointed out
>         that we
>              will also include in a revision shortly.____
>
>              __ __
>
>              Thanks,____
>
>              Mary. ____
>
>              __ __
>
>
>              On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Brett Tate
>         <brett@broadsoft.com <mailto:brett@broadsoft.com>
>              <mailto:brett@broadsoft.com <mailto:brett@broadsoft.com>>>
>         wrote:____
>
>
>              Hi,
>
>              The ABNF of draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-__11's
>         hi-targeted-to-uri is
>              not backwards compatible with RFC 4244.
>
>              Is this intentional?  And if so, should it be mentioned within
>              section 16 and/or 16.1?
>
>              Thanks,
>              Brett
>
>              -----
>
>              draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-__11:
>
>                 History-Info = "History-Info" HCOLON hi-entry *(COMMA
>         hi-entry)
>
>                 hi-entry = hi-targeted-to-uri *(SEMI hi-param)
>
>                 hi-targeted-to-uri = addr-spec / name-addr
>
>
>              RFC 4244:
>
>                 History-Info = "History-Info" HCOLON hi-entry *(COMMA
>         hi-entry)
>
>                 hi-entry = hi-targeted-to-uri *( SEMI hi-param )
>
>                 hi-targeted-to-uri= name-addr
>
>              This email is intended solely for the person or entity to
>         which it
>              is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
>              information. If you are not the intended recipient and have
>         received
>              this email in error, please notify BroadSoft, Inc.
>         immediately by
>              replying to this message, and destroy all copies of this
>         message,
>              along with any attachment, prior to reading, distributing
>         or copying it.
>              _________________________________________________
>              sipcore mailing list
>         sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
>         <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/sipcore____
>         <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore____>
>
>              __ __
>
>
>
>
>
>         _________________________________________________
>         sipcore mailing list
>         sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/sipcore
>         <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>
>
>
>     _________________________________________________
>     sipcore mailing list
>     sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/__listinfo/sipcore
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>
>
>