Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip From header without user part

2022-08-04 Thread Dale R. Worley
Rakesh writes: > I could see in a sip CANCEL message From Header as below > > From: "test" ;tag=3bbb9483d215d830c635372f8f181929 > > is this correct? To summarize what Paul has said: Syntactically, this header is valid. But usually the question is whether the entire SIP message containing the

Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip From header without user part

2022-08-04 Thread Paul Kyzivat
On 8/4/22 11:09 AM, Rakesh wrote: Hi Paul, Thanks for your response. Quoting your statementĀ "But it makes no sense to send this unless there was a matching prior sip request with the same sip URI." If I understood correctly theĀ earlier request prior to CANCEL is normally a sip INVITE. And

Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip From header without user part

2022-08-04 Thread Rakesh
Hi Paul, Thanks for your response. Quoting your statement "But it makes no sense to send this unless there was a matching prior sip request with the same sip URI." If I understood correctly the earlier request prior to CANCEL is normally a sip INVITE. And in case of INVITE has been sent with the

Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip From header without user part

2022-08-04 Thread Paul Kyzivat
On 8/4/22 8:11 AM, Rakesh wrote: Hi Team, I could see in a sip CANCEL message From Header as below From: "test" ;tag=3bbb9483d215d830c635372f8f181929 is this correct? Just looking at this, without regard for context, it is valid syntax. (The userinfo portion of the sip URI is optional.)

[Sip-implementors] Sip From header without user part

2022-08-04 Thread Rakesh
Hi Team, I could see in a sip CANCEL message From Header as below From: "test" ;tag=3bbb9483d215d830c635372f8f181929 is this correct? Normally the From header is sip:user@domain As per ABNF grammar, the above one is also should not be an issue as From header but could let me know if I