Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers
"Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com> Wed, 10 November 2010 01:47 UTC
Return-Path: <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.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 512893A6904 for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:47:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.099, 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 0bow4irM-Hix for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:47:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ms03.m0019.fra.mmp.de.bt.com (m0019.fra.mmp.de.bt.com [62.180.227.30]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 326DB3A68AB for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:47:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from senmx12-mx ([62.134.46.10] [62.134.46.10]) by ms03.m0020.fra.mmp.de.bt.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2240648; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 02:46:48 +0100
Received: from MCHP063A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.61]) by senmx12-mx (Server) with ESMTP id D71DE23F028E; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 02:46:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from MCHP058A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.55]) by MCHP063A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.61]) with mapi; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 02:46:48 +0100
From: "Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com>
To: SIPCORE Chairs <sipcore-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "SIPCORE (Session Initiation Protocol Core) WG" <sipcore@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 02:46:46 +0100
Thread-Topic: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers
Thread-Index: Act/7fuf6bscUKp/QZ6eF+3pdklD4wAis/BA
Message-ID: <A444A0F8084434499206E78C106220CA023587F124@MCHP058A.global-ad.net>
References: <4CD90FFC.40502@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CD90FFC.40502@nostrum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers
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: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:47:09 -0000
I think we have to make provision for >1, and limiting it to 2 probably doesn't make sense. However, the warnings must include the fact that anyone inserting an additional location and then getting back a 424 has no way of knowing whether the 424 applies to the location it inserted or a location already present. John > -----Original Message----- > From: sipcore-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:sipcore-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Roach - > SIPCORE Chair > Sent: 09 November 2010 09:10 > To: SIPCORE (Session Initiation Protocol Core) WG > Subject: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers > > [as chair] > > I just wanted to summarize where it looks like the discussion > ended up > on whether we constrain the number of location header fields in a SIP > message. From my review of the discussion, I believe that four people > have weighed in on the topic to voice support for an > arbitrary number of > location headers (albeit with a implementation warning that > doing so is > not advisable): > > Martin Thompson: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg03576.html > Richard Barnes: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg03580.html > Keith Drage: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg03600.html > Hannu Hietalahti: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg03619.html > > And two people have agreed to go along with that direction, with > expressed reservations: > > Jon Peterson: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg03601.html > James Polk: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg03603.html > > If any other working group participants have comments on this topic, > they are encouraged to make them quickly. Lacking any further > input, the > authors will be instructed to revise the document to allow an > arbitrary > number of location header fields, with an accompanying warning that > doing so is not recommended. > > /a > _______________________________________________ > sipcore mailing list > sipcore@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore >
- [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers Adam Roach - SIPCORE Chair
- Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers Elwell, John
- Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers Thomson, Martin
- Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers hannu.hietalahti
- Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers James M. Polk
- Re: [sipcore] Summary: number of location headers hannu.hietalahti