Hello,
RFC 3261 imposes the following restriction on URIs presented in the
Contact, From, To, Reply-To header fields:
Even if the "display-name" is empty, the "name-addr" form MUST be
used if the "addr-spec" contains a comma, semicolon, or question
mark. There may or may not be LWS between the display-name and the
"<".
On the other hand, RFC 3515 does not set such restriction:
2.1 The Refer-To Header Field
Refer-To is a request header field (request-header) as defined by
[1]. It only appears in a REFER request. It provides a URL to
reference.
Refer-To = ("Refer-To" / "r") HCOLON ( name-addr / addr-spec ) *
(SEMI generic-param)
This makes the following field legal:
Refer-To: sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];
Replaces=090459243588173445%3B
to-tag%3D9m2n3wq%3Bfrom-tag%3D763231&Require=replaces
and some implementations do try to format Refer-To: fields this way.
Should we accept this format, or should the RFC 3515 be corrected?
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Akindinov -- Stalker Labs.
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
