Vikram Chhibber schrieb: > IMO "pres" uri is meant for presentity/watchers participants for > "presence" and related event packages. > "sip" scheme is more generic and may include "sip protocol" > participants including call and "presence". > All these schemes are meant for IP domain. TEL scheme is defined to > accommodate E.164 numbers from non-IP domain and SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY > framework is not defined for these entities unless you have some ENUM > mapping available > I am not sure whether this is convincing enough.
Yes, ENUM is an perfect example why it should be valid. The client sends a request to the proxy with tel URI in RURI and To header. The proxy performs an ENUM lookup, gets back the SIP URI und forwards the call, thus the RURI contains a SIP URI, but the To header contains still the tel: URI. Thus, IMO it is short-sighted to only allow pres and SIP(S) URIs. regards klaus _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
