On 2007.10.07 04:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You should read RFC 3261. Especially section 25.1.
You are right.
> The EBNF entries for User-Agent are:
> server-val = product / comment
> product = token [SLASH product-version]
> product-version = token
> User-Agent = "User-Agent" HCOLON server-val *(LWS server-val)
> So at best, the correct version would be
> User-Agent: Linphone/1.7.1 (eXosip 0.1)
"eXosip 0.1" is a product server-val itself, so I 'd suggest
User-Agent: Linphone/1.7.1 (eXosip/0.1)
or, if we 'd like to advertise more components
User-Agent: Linphone/1.7.1 (eXosip/0.1 any_other_component/vers.ion)
Well, comment is not structured and IMO you should not assume anything
about its contents.
comment = LPAREN *(ctext / quoted-pair / comment) RPAREN
ctext = %x21-27 / %x2A-5B / %x5D-7E / UTF8-NONASCII
/ LWS
quoted-pair = "\" (%x00-09 / %x0B-0C
/ %x0E-7F)
And it definitely should be user-configurable.
What do you think?
I would think that the product value of Linphone should tell you the
product value of any sub-components. However, it *is* a comment field,
so you can put anything in there allowed by the EBNF. Just don't expect
any tools to use that information for anything.
You could also request expanding the User-Agent definition to include
sub-component information in a structured way. That would probably have
to go through the SIP working group.
--
Mark A. Flacy
_______________________________________________
Linphone-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/linphone-users
