Michael, My reading of RFC3325 indicates that P-Asserted-Identity/P-Preferred-Identity is only added on a method (e.g. INVITE) to indicate the identity of the caller. I do not see where it would be applied to a 18x provisional response to indicate the identity of the called party. Am I missing something?
/a Michael Procter wrote: > Alan Crosswell wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Has there been a replacement functionality for the expired >> draft-ietf-sip-privacy Remote-Party-ID header in 18x responses to >> INVITEs? This is used, e.g. by Polycom hard phones, to indicate the >> Called Party name back to the Calling Party. Perhaps the To header in >> the 18x reply is edited by a B2BUA to implement this? >> >> Thanks. >> /a > > You might want to look at RFC3325, which offers a similar function under > certain circumstances. > > Regards, > > Michael Procter _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
