IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sipcore] #13: Section 7 item 2 is not complete

Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> Tue, 12 October 2010 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AE833A6AB3 for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:40:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id prQFH7A6R3Np for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:40:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD0F3A6A87 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gwb10 with SMTP id 10so43976gwb.31 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+nh/N9OG5jlja4Urjvi08bWr32EjWypHnW00s59pKxU=; b=AbtDlF6yzvCXKzytdDpYjgtOFJnBQ+ZcgJWXTJ53vpdtwRDDXS6FQO8WjS8P6p3Q7d pXsurIFIeoonj39WtpQzp3pzLjEO7OA82GtTwFTBI0A9h64/8chWl7upJrY2wGEG1ZXs LlAURNACmOzqVxw8Exnr6ZzcdKzW8Bm9tUO5g=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=CSON+4k3wdCLP4Jr9ec8y7foTYuUXp1uxWfmVdqr2IIGD6nuH2O1yRHM63p/rUugvE +gdGw8+VwBGOja+9tP3ap3OjYKOx8+/Sy4HfFMCGxQ9GwvQ+38qPzE6TvHxyE0vy/dgM n9GA1gD0eulbxxS083Yxe7+ZGxRG72FNkaGdE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.108.178 with SMTP id q38mr16256475yhg.9.1286923293570; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.108.172 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <064.6c32c8048648b3e859ada9acae1f68a3@tools.ietf.org>
References: <064.6c32c8048648b3e859ada9acae1f68a3@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:41:33 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wqmML+XRx0xZNkVBGjPmEgNcMEhPDJsLkmgTW@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>
To: SIPCORE <sipcore@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [sipcore] #13: Section 7 item 2 is not complete
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 12 Oct 2010 22:40:21 -0000

Note, that per my response on #41, if we add an index for the "rc"
parameter, then I think this problem goes away.

Item 2 in section 7 would then read:
<t> Entry with the index that matches the value of the last entry with
a "rc"    header parameter
      in the Request received by a UAS - i.e.,
      the Request URI associated with the destination of the request
      was determined based on an AOR-to-contact binding in an abstract
location service. </t>

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:08 PM, sipcore issue tracker
<trac@tools.ietf.org> wrote:
> #13: Section 7 item 2 is not complete
> ------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
>  Reporter:  hkaplan@…               |       Owner:
>     Type:  defect                  |      Status:  new
>  Priority:  major                   |   Milestone:  milestone1
> Component:  rfc4244bis              |     Version:  2.0
>  Severity:  In WG Last Call         |    Keywords:
> ------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
>  Section 7 item 2 says:
>        2.  Entry prior to last entry with hi-target of "rc" in the Request
>        received by a UAS - i.e., the Request URI associated with the
>        destination of the request was determined based on a Registered
>        Contact.
>
>  That is only true if no forking occurred, and the request wasn't contact-
>  routed multiple times in series (i.e., as an SBC might cause).
>
>  A more correct sentence (I think) would be:
>       2.  Last non-"rc" entry of the same branch, prior to last entry with
>  hi-target of "rc" in the Request
>        received by a UAS - i.e., the Request URI associated with the
>        destination of the request was determined based on a Registered
>        Contact.
>
> --
> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sipcore/trac/ticket/13>
> sipcore <http://tools.ietf.org/sipcore/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipcore mailing list
> sipcore@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email