Paul,

Thanks for clarifying.    

Regards,
Monica.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul D.Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 7:54 AM
> To: Monica Chitre
> Cc: SIP-IMPLEMENTORS WG
> Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] response to REGISTER with contact=*
> 
> Monica,
> 
> I interpret the intention of step 8, section 10.3, as defining the
> following
> logic
> 
>   when building a REGISTER response...
>   for each current binding
>     Insert a Contact header/value indicating the binding
>   endfor
> 
> Since there are no current bindings, no Contact header is required.
> 
> Note that table 2, section 20, clearly permits a response to a
REGISTER to
> contain no Contacts since the Contact field is optional.
> 
> Regards,
> Paul DS
> 
> Paul D.Smith
> Network Protocols Group
> Data Connection Ltd (DCL)
> Tel: +44 20 8366 1177  Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Fax: +44 20 8363 1039  Web:   http://www.dataconnection.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Monica Chitre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 20 April 2004 23:52
> To: SIP (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] response to REGISTER with contact=*
> 
> 
> Hi Venkat,
> Thanks for your response.  The example shows no contact header.
> 
> The section I was referring to is 10.3 (Under Step 8 for what the
> registrar does after receiving a REGISTER):
> "The response MUST contain Contact header field values enumerating all
> current bindings."
> 
> So, I was wondering should you return Contact header with null value
or
> "*" or omit it as the example (but that contradicts the statement
> above).
> 
> Regards,
> Monica.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Goud, Venkat Ramana (Venkat) ** CTR ** [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:14 PM
> > To: Monica Chitre; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: Sasha Ruditsky
> > Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] response to REGISTER with contact=*
> >
> >
> > It's correct.
> > The response must contain Contact header field values
> > enumerating all current bindings. In the example UA is
> > unregistering all bindings, so there are no current bindings
> > hence an empty contact header.
> >
> > -venkat
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:sip-implementors-> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> > Monica Chitre
> > Sent:
> > Tuesday, April 20, 2004 3:50 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: Sasha Ruditsky
> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] response to REGISTER with contact=*
> >
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > RFC 3261 mentions that Contact header MUST be present in a
> > response to a REGISTER message.
> >
> > But in looking at the un-REGISTER example in RFC 3665 (call
> > flows), I see that when a REGISTER with contact=* and
> > expires=0 is sent, then the response does not have a contact
> > header.  Is this correct?  Should it have a contact header
> > and if yes, what should it be set to, "*"?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Monica.
> >
> > Monica Chitre
> > RADVISION, Inc.
> > 266 Harristown Road, Suite 201
> > Glen Rock, NJ  07452
> > Voice: 201-689-6365
> > Fax:   201-689-6301
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors


_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to