Hi Peter,
One followup that may change everything I said about Broadsoft being
wrong: rfc 6044.
Looks like this informational rfc addressed the odd syntax you found in
rfc 5806:
3.2. Diversion Header Syntax
The following text is restating the exact syntax that the production
rules in
Discussion about the compliance of some particular vendor to this is
probably pointless. The draft was never a standard. It existed as a
personal draft for a long time, and finally was moved directly from that
to Historic status, without ever having been a standards track RFC. The
move to
