From: "Michael Procter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I think that 'no circumstances' is a little strong. From RFC3261 Section 18.2.1:
Ouch! I certainly stand corrected there. It shows that I haven't worked with NATed systems enough. The full precedures are in 18.2.2, but they depend on the "received" parameter added by 18.2.1. Looking at the original poster's problem: > From: Jagan Mohan Reddy S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > What is the behavior of UAS on invalid sent-by field in the > incoming request? It sould certainly be acceptable under 18.2.1 for the receive stack to add a "received" parameter containing the request source IP address, because the receive stack can't determine that the sent-by field matches the source IP address. And once that happens, under 18.2.2, it would be acceptable for the send stack to send the response to the "received" IP address, because the "received" parameter is to be examined before the sent-by field. Dale _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
